No. That was one of them, but the other decision had to do with foreign affairs recently. I think it had to do with the Canadian government not requesting no death penalty in the case of a Canadian in the United States. It was very recent. It was with Omar Khadr, but it had to do with foreign affairs and the court ruled that in fact the government had not done everything it should do. It determined that in fact the individual's rights had been violated; however, it left it to the government to come up with the solution.
Would that be a case where the court rules that there is a violation, but because there isn't sufficient law attached to it, a judicial matter, it's not in a position to be able to actually come up with the actual remedy itself?