Mr. Justice O'Connor talks about that. In fact his first recommendation goes directly to the heart of that matter.
There are lines that, by force, get blurred from time to time, but I agree with Mr. Justice O'Connor: you have to work really hard to try to keep the lines as distinct as possible. CSIS is there to collect intelligence. They are not a law enforcement agency. They do not do criminal investigations. In fact, as Mr. Justice O'Connor found, at least in relation to this, CSIS conducted itself quite appropriately, in that they turned whatever information they had over to the RCMP in relation to Mr. Arar and certain other intelligence they had. They turned it over and it was then up to the force to carry that information, to use that information in the context of an ongoing investigation, as I understand it.
There does have to be a discussion between CSIS and the RCMP in terms of CSIS saying “We have the following intelligence”, and the RCMP and CSIS do have to talk together to determine whether that information is sufficiently concrete or substantive, that it is something the RCMP would then pursue in the context of a criminal investigation.
You do have to try to keep these two entities separate and what they do separate. CSIS gathers intelligence. Some of that intelligence may ultimately be transferred to the RCMP for the purpose of an ongoing criminal investigation, which may or may not lead to charges at some point. The vast majority of information collected by CSIS or any intelligence-gathering entity never goes to a law enforcement agency for ongoing investigation. It's not that kind of information that's collected.