First of all, I don't think they're wrong. I happen to be dissenting on it. I don't see them being wrong and I certainly don't see myself as being wrong.
There is a good reason, and there are in fact precedents. There is movement. I alluded to it and I'm saying it again. There's worldwide movement across the globe to civilianize military tribunals. The U.K. is a case in point, but it's not the only place. That did not exist when retired Chief Justice Dickson wrote his report then. I cannot speak to whether or not retired Chief Justice LeSage looked into that, but there is a requirement, as I explained, for two overarching but contributing concepts. One is to ensure civilian supremacy and one is to show an independence from the military chain of command, to have a civilian judge in military tribunals.
I'm not advocating to do away with military tribunals; I'm advocating making those judges civilian. There are in fact occasions to do that. It's been done in the U.K., it's been done in Australia, it's been done in New Zealand; do the same.
The situation today is quite different from what it was when Mr. Dickson wrote his opinion a number of years ago, almost two decades ago.