In my opinion, that question will come forward and will be referred to the courts. They will have to decide, for example, based on what mechanism it is possible not to render a decision, because that is one of the mechanisms provided for in Bill C-50. Up until now, we have been able to either accept or reject an application. Henceforth, it will be possible to accept or reject, or render no decision whatsoever.
As was pointed out by the Canadian Bar Association and the Barreau du Québec, not rendering a decision means that there is no possibility of judicial review, since there has been no decision. Thus there would no longer be any avenue for appealing such a decision. It is possible that the courts will decide that, since they are the guarantors of individual rights, if no decision has been rendered two, three or four years later, one can assume that the decision is negative, such that individuals will have a right of appeal.
I think it is really too bad that, once again, we are leaving it up to the courts to do this work. I would suggest an amendment, which would be to delete that section and ensure that a decision is made and that all applicants thus have a potential avenue of appeal.