Yes, there are three or four things I think Canada could do.
The most direct thing Canada could do is actually to initiate a prosecution of Ahmadinejad. And it could do that under its universal jurisdiction statute. As part of Canada's joining the International Criminal Court, it had to pass domestic legislation that would be compatible with its obligations under the Rome Statute. The Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Act is what did that. And that gives Canada jurisdiction, again under a universal jurisdiction theory, to bring a prosecution for genocide or crimes against humanity right here in Canadian courts.
Now, how successful would Canada be in actually getting custody of Ahmadinejad? We know that would be a stretch. It'd be tough. What kind of statement would that make, however? It would be huge.
Secondly, as I mentioned, Australia—Kevin Rudd in particular—has talked about initiating an action before the International Court of Justice, pursuant to article 9 of the genocide convention, the so-called “compromissory clause”, which provides that the International Court of Justice would have jurisdiction over a dispute related to the genocide convention. If Canada were to do that, Canada could at least help, if you will, the world's highest court issue a judgment that Iran has violated its obligations under the genocide convention, and at least issue an order enjoining Ahmadinejad and Iran from continuing to incite to genocide. It's a long process. It's civil; it's not criminal. But again, it would be better than nothing.
In many ways, I'm very honoured to be here, because I think Canada has been something of the world's conscience on many issues. I think Canada is in a very good position to try to persuade the UN or its various bodies to issue a resolution or sanctions, or something, that would condemn what Ahmadinejad is doing. It's a series of potential actions that could be taken. And I hope Canada can fulfill that role, as it has on so many occasions in the past.