I ask the question because in this case, the chair could no longer operate within the mandate that he had been given. The pressure was so great that he had to resign. He clearly stated in this letter that he did not have the resources that he needed to deliver the goods.
Now let's take the example of Ms. Keen. There can also be interference or intrusion in day-to-day activities or in the carrying out of an appointee's decision-making or management mandate to operate the agency or organization. When we talk about a supervisory role, there are indirect means that can influence the carrying out of a mandate.
Ms. Keen did not resign: she was fired. I am not asking you to comment directly on her case. The committee heard the concern expressed by the IRB chair who appeared before it. I believe that the committee also heard from Ms. Keen. However, it seems to me that, without drawing any conclusions, if a person who is caught in this type of situation is without the means or does not want to undertake legal proceedings, then the whole thing might simply be dropped and forgotten.