Since the discussion has veered somewhat into political territory, I would just add, as an observation, that we should speak of the Government of Canada more so than the current government, because the position of the Government of Canada with respect to Mr. Khadr has been absolutely consistent since his original detention under three different prime ministers and several ministers of justice. One member of this committee sat around the cabinet table when that policy was crafted, I believe.
Mr. Matas, you said that Mr. Khadr has been subject to arbitrary prolonged detention, and the other witnesses have testified that there have been unreasonable delays in his case going to trial. Is it not true that there has been a series of procedural motions in the American judiciary that have effectively delayed his trial and that of others accused at Guantanamo Bay in cases such as Rasul v. Bush, Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, Rumsfeld v. Padilla, Padilla v. Hanft, all of which resulted in congressional amendments to the Military Commissions Act. Would it not be contextually more honest to point out that the delay in trial is at least in part a result of these procedural delays, these motions?