That's a good point.
May I turn to Mr. Granger and Ms. Weinstein on this concern about summary trials?
You make very valid points and you reinforce previous witnesses who have been supremely articulate on this point.
Certainly I did not understand. I've never actually participated in or observed a military summary trial. From what I understand, the conviction rate is about 98%. They certainly put the “summary” in summary trial. It appears that this whole thing is set up so that you're guilty until proven innocent. You are literally, if not frogmarched, then double-marched into a situation facing either service offences or possibly also criminal offences such as, say, possession of marijuana, for which you could actually get a Criminal Code conviction.
It strikes me as fundamentally unfair to not have access to counsel, to not have any appeal ability, to in effect be humiliated in front of your peers, to have your commanding officer there, to have the prosecutor be both the trier of fact and the prosecutor, and to have virtually no access to pardon procedures and no ability to appeal.
Does this whole process strike you as fundamentally unfair?