Thank you, Madam Chair.
Welcome to both witnesses today. Thank you so much for being here and taking the time to share with and express your views to the committee, because it's very important that in this process we get a wide range of opinions from Canadians.
Mr. Pagtakhan, just to clarify, under the new process—and I think you would agree—the vast majority of cases, such as those related to residence fraud, concealing criminal admissibility, identity theft, and that type of thing, would be decided by the minister, but of course only with evidence presented from law enforcement, courts, and so forth. More exceptional cases, such as something like war crimes, of course, or crimes against humanity, as well as security cases, international human rights violations, organized crime, and that sort of thing, would be decided by the Federal Court.
I'll start with you, sir. We know that a Canadian citizen can have their citizenship taken away if they've obtained it fraudulently. Almost all of our peer countries have the ability to revoke citizenship for things like treason, terrorism, and other sorts of serious offences. However, people who criticize this bill claim that Canadian citizenship is an unalienable right. How would you respond to that?