Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Pat's in good shape, so he's a supporter.
Obviously, I think the rationale lies again in that distinct aspect of being in the military. Military judges are still members of the military and as such are still required to meet all standards, fitness ones included, in terms of the ability to serve.
One of the comments you may have heard, Mr. Chair, not only in the context of military justice but also in administrative law, is something called the “universality of service principle”, which basically means that every member of the Canadian Forces--us included, judges--has to be fit to meet minimum standards so that if they're in scenarios where they would have to perhaps lift heavy items, carry people on stretchers, they'd meet those standards.
If a judge for some reason didn't meet that, I think it would be difficult for the system to treat it the way it would with any other soldier and simply say, “Get in shape or you're gone.” I think this provides an avenue where, if that were the case--and I'm speculating at the end of the day on how realistic that scenario would be--it would provide a mechanism by which the judge's fitness, which in this case could be the physical fitness, could be examined without the chain of command having direct interference and then the perception of infringing upon independence.