Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I will continue along the same lines as Mrs. Brière.
It seems to me that this situation is so rare, we cannot find a single example where someone could successfully use it as a defence. Aren’t you concerned that, since this defence is so difficult to use, the Supreme Court will end up telling us yet again that it’s unconstitutional? Doesn’t the difficulty of imagining a situation where this could apply mean that the provisions under section 33.1 could be deemed non-charter compliant?