The differences are night and day. The normal detention provision under the act is that there is a detention review after 48 hours, then after seven days, then every 30 days thereafter.
In the most exceptional detention regime that we have, which is dealing with security certificates, there's a detention review at the beginning and then a review at least every six months thereafter. This is even harsher than the security certificate regime, which the Supreme Court of Canada commented on in the Charkaoui case. I don't even understand how one would present an argument that this is constitutional.
If I were arguing for the Department of Justice, I would be in a very difficult position arguing for the constitutionality of these provisions where there's a one-year detention with no review. It may be that the recourse is going to be by way of habeas corpus in the provincial courts, as the federal legislation will just have fallen. But there will be no mechanism for review, and the law with respect to detention will have to be dealt with in some way and that may be through way of habeas corpus. I don't know if that's the intention of the legislator or not, that the provincial courts deal with the detention issue, but that seems to be the only recourse that will be left.