Monsieur Petit, you asked us about evidence relating to the discriminatory impact of the Criminal Code. In our brief, in footnotes 19 to 23, we actually provide a page of references supporting this position.
What I haven't mentioned today is the evidence we have from the United States and Australia, where mandatory minimum sentences are already in effect. They definitively have a discriminatory impact in those countries. They have been condemned by international human rights bodies. Most recently, the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination condemned Australia for the discriminatory impact of this mandatory minimum sentence legislation.
I think another point that highlights the discriminatory application of mandatory minimums is the fact that mandatory minimums are only applied to crimes that target already disadvantaged persons. You don't see mandatory minimum sentences applied to white collar crimes. It just doesn't happen. This is just another example of really what is adverse-effect discrimination. It's not direct discrimination, as the laws don't discriminate on their face; it's just the impact. Pursuant to Supreme Court of Canada jurisprudence, intent--direct discrimination, with the intention to discriminate--is not necessary to establish discrimination.