Okay.
When I look at section 1 of the charter, it says “reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society”. Clearly, “prescribed by law” meets that test. The question is whether it's a reasonable limit and whether it can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.
I meant to ask you to talk a little bit about that, but I noticed, going through this, that in the note submitted by the justice minister, he has written down, under the second bullet, that
...fault-based criminality is a principle of fundamental justice under s. 7 of the Charter and that an absolute liability offence (i.e., an offence that does not require a guilty mind or mens rea) that is punishable by imprisonment violates the principles of fundamental justice under s. 7 and that this violation cannot be saved under s. 1 (it cannot be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society).
I have just one more thing before I ask you for your comment on that. Looking at section 7, which guarantees life, liberty, and security of the person, I think it's pretty clear we're not trying to protect the security of the person, or your bill isn't in any way limiting the security of the person or the life of the mother, so I assume it has to with the liberty of the accused.
Would that be your take on this, that what they're getting at is an unjustified limitation of the liberty of the accused, or...?