The other item that I want to come to is the reliability assessment. The individual who conducted the reliability assessment for CSIS, with respect to the intelligence being gotten by the Syrian government, had no experience in torture. Therefore it led to this information being given credibility and the belief that this information was not given under duress.
The first question is why? In Justice O'Connor's report it is very clearly stated that if a proper assessment had been done by somebody with experience in torture—in fact, it wouldn't have taken a lot of work to find out that torture happened in Syria—we would have been able to dispute that information and may have been able to get Maher Arar back sooner. Why was this assessment not done by somebody who had experience in torture?