It's not another appeal process. It doesn't usurp the role of the courts. That's important. That's critical to understand.
Is it a fundamental change? It's a change in the test. As opposed to the test that I currently operate under, which is whether a miscarriage of justice “likely occurred”, we have a test that is “may have occurred”. We have factors that I outlined in my opening comments whereby you're supposed to look directly at the personal circumstances of the individuals, including their life characteristics and lived experiences, with particular attention to Black and indigenous individuals and their overrepresentation in the justice system.
I think with that kind of focus, what you're going to have is an attentive body that is well-staffed, well-resourced and out there, doing the outreach that has the ability to engage different demographics, including those two demographics that we know are sorely overrepresented in our justice system.
It's going to make a very substantive difference.