I just have a question. I apologize for not being here for all of the testimony.
Colonel Gleeson, you said that in the small number of cases where trial by court martial is under way, the accused has already chosen their trier of fact. So I guess you were trying to get us to think that's okay. But of course, I think Trépanier says that the discretion or choice was all that of the prosecutor, for lack of a better word; so he wouldn't have argued against it, knowing at the time that the prosecutor had that authority. That doesn't persuade me that what clause 28 is doing is right, frankly.
Maybe you didn't have enough time to explain it, or maybe I'm too new at this, or whatever, but can you get me out of the woods on this one?