I found it interesting that they took the recommendations of Canada and the UPR so seriously that they actually rejected some of them. I would have thought that the easier thing would have been to give a nod and say “sure” or “fine” and then do nothing. But they actually accepted two and rejected the rest. It was a bit more honest than I expected.
I also noticed that they rejected the one about the independence of the judiciary. That's one thing we've heard a lot about here at this committee, the complete lack of independence of the judiciary appointments—decisions unappealable, bad decisions. What can you tell us about that?