Thank you.
I think what you're referring to is probably the freeze under the constitution, which has now actually been put into regular law. Originally the Swiss constitution allowed for the federal council to freeze assets immediately if they could be considered a concern to its foreign policy interests. This was used very creatively—and very openly, positively so—for many years to freeze assets. They were typically the fastest ones to react to the Arab Spring, to the fall of the Yanukovych regime, and so on. That allowed assets to be preventively frozen. It is a very important system.
I understand that Canada has a somewhat similar system. It is maybe not as fast, but it is important.
Obviously that doesn't prevent criminal law enforcement activities from double-freezing and triple-freezing later on. Under this provision you cannot keep it frozen forever, because at some point you have issues with the rights of the defendants.
I think the recent change in the Swiss legislation that's really important to look at is the issue of mutual legal assistance with countries that are so-called failing states. I won't be able to go into details here, but it's definitely worth looking at the legislation that entered into force on June 1 or July 1 in Switzerland. I'm more than happy to share the link to the legislation with the clerk for distribution, and it certainly is available in French. It deals with one of the critical issues of mutual legal assistance with failing states, which is what happens when a case falls apart. Oftentimes, you don't get the evidence you need from the other jurisdiction or you cannot transfer evidence to that jurisdiction because the systems have fallen apart. That part of the Swiss legislation is probably really worth looking at.