I kept my questions brief. It's for you to keep the witnesses brief, Mr. Chair. Just bear that in mind.
In response to Mr. Cotler's response--I understand he may have written something before--he was part of cabinet. I have great respect for Mr. Cotler, but he joined a cabinet that established the policy now maintained by this government. The basic facts at law have not changed. Perhaps there have been some revelations of it in terms of evidence, but I think it's slightly disingenuous to say that the current government's position is an innovation. It certainly is not.
Mr. Matas, you've said that Canada, by doing nothing, is violating the convention. Could you point out to us the provision of the optional protocol that would require Canada, in this instance, to seek extradition of Mr. Khadr? I don't know what the instrument is--perhaps a penal transfer.
Second, insofar as you have admitted that the protocol does not prohibit the prosecution of alleged child soldiers between the ages of 15 and 18, is that not possibly because not all child soldiers are equal? Would you not admit that a 17-year-old who on his own volition, to pursue an ideological or religious cause, decides to engage in acts of violence as a soldier does not bear the same degree of culpability as, say, a 12-year-old in Sierra Leone who is rounded up at gunpoint, drugged up, and brainwashed? Would you not admit that there are degrees or variations of culpability as it relates to minors who are engaged in armed conflict?