I don't normally know chief justices to be superficial. Do you believe that these two eminent jurists would not have analyzed charter issues before endorsing summary trials? If so, can you comment on the weight that Chief Justices Dickson and Lamer gave in their analysis to such safeguards as the right to an election of trial or court martial, the right to receive legal advice, the role of the assisting officer, and the right to request a review of the findings and sentence of a summary trial. I think they were not superficial.
On February 28th, 2011. See this statement in context.