It is becoming repetitious. There are a number of problems with this motion. It is a sloppy motion—I hate to be so blunt. There are four issues here. It forces the committee to withdraw a motion that was passed and is before the House. There is not just a procedural problem with that, but the previous motion dealt with humanitarian issues. I seriously doubt we would want to do that.
The next problem is, established by whom? We assume, but the amendment doesn't make it clear, that it would be Canadian courts.
Mr. Calandra, the mover of the motion, keeps talking about and referring to the IRB. These are very serious crimes. We can't have anything other than courts establish whether someone is a criminal of that type.
And then finally, Sri Lanka is a country in which there isn't a black and a white. Both sides have committed war crimes, and there's a tremendous difficulty. To whom do you return people who have been established by the Canadian court system to be war criminals? What would be the justice meted out to someone who participated with the army in engaging in war crimes, and what is the justice they would face if they were with the Tamil Tigers and had committed war crimes?
That's the final, fundamental issue here: Canada has always been careful not to deport to countries in which we have absolutely no confidence in the justice systems in place at the time.