I will attempt to give you a brief explanation. As recently recognized by the Supreme Court of Canada, there is a right in principle under which within the boundaries of a country, the government of the country concerned has full jurisdiction over its citizens.
Let's look at the opposite example. If FBI agents were to come to Canada and they wanted to speak to you, I think that you would be rather unhappy and you would ask yourself if your government tolerated that. That is the principle that applies in this case. For us to be allowed to go there as representatives of the Government of Canada—which investigators would be—this principle requires an agreement between the countries authorizing us to do that. The agreement requires communication. Now, the agreement that exists between the two countries is a treaty stating that in criminal cases, we can communicate and have access to people in the United States, provided that they accept to speak to us. We cannot compel them to appear before us. But in this case, the investigation showed that there was no indication or any proof of any crime. The treaty I mentioned was of no use to us.