All right.
Thank you for your comments. In particular, you've raised some points about listing and delisting and some of what our closest international partners have done. I would like to go over this just very quickly. I mean, this is a conversation that we could probably have for about an hour, but I'll make it short.
First and foremost, I think, is that countries around the world, and certainly our closest allies, have listing regimes. Those regimes are flexible. Those regimes meet domestic security needs of that particular country. Those listing regimes may be a joining of domestic and foreign policy initiatives and so on, so why one country lists and why one other country delists is not necessarily congruent to what goes on in Canada.
Listing is typically based on intelligence, as you pointed out, but what's unique about terrorist groups, and certainly a list...we approach the list as a living thing. Terrorist groups ebb and flow through time. They change, they morph, and the individuals within are not always static; therefore, a list as well ought not to be static. That is a concept you find in the Criminal Code, in the listing part of section 83.05, and I think that's an important part.
Now, in our domestic listing regime, there is a mandatory two-year review, which you may be aware of, in which the Minister of Public Safety makes a recommendation to the Governor in Council, who comes to a decision on whether or not the entities that are currently on the list ought to remain listed.
However, there are other ways in our domestic regime whereby an entity can become removed or delisted. One is that the entity can apply to the Minister of Public Safety. I'll note that the MeK has not applied in the Canadian case. They did apply in the U.K., the U.S., and the EU.