For those of you who don't understand French, you will need your interpretation device, as I will be speaking in French.
First of all, I want to congratulate you on your work and especially on the arguments you have presented.
I would like you to imagine for a moment that you are in court. I have no formal legal training, but imagine that I am a judge and that I have just heard your arguments. If I am not satisfied, I have to challenge you and that is what I intend to do.
Perhaps you prepared your case a few weeks ago. As you undoubtedly know, the Supreme Court of Canada has just handed down a very important ruling that you need to consider as you argue you case. The court has just ruled that Canada violated the rights of Omar Khadr when it turned over the transcripts of his interrogation to US officials, something that it was not supposed to do.
Still according to the Supreme Court, Canadian officials abroad are bound to uphold the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, which means that if international obligations run counter to the Charter's provisions, then the Charter should have precedence.
Your arguments must take into account what the US Supreme Court said about Guantanamo Bay, namely that it is illegal to deny inmates the right to challenge their incarceration before a regular US court. That is an important finding. The US Supreme Court also held that military commissions violated the Geneva Conventions. That is also a very important detail.
I'd like to hear your views on my party's position, namely that Omar Khadr should be afforded consular services in line with the Supreme Court decision that he should be returned to Canada and given a fair trial. In addition, to tie in with what Mr. Pashtoonyar said, he should be tried before a youth court judge, since he was only 15 years old at the time he committed the acts that lead to his incarceration.
It is important for me to challenge your arguments.