I understand that we have to exchange information with our allies in order to protect ourselves from security threats. However, if there is a most highly restricted list, it is criminal records. I'm not familiar enough with the system to know that a lot of people have committed crimes and may be dangerous without ever having been convicted. If there is one truly objective document, it is the one that cites the legal decisions determining that a person has committed crimes. I wonder if that isn't the first document that is consulted when people want to assess the danger an individual presents. First the criminal record is checked, then other things, no? In any case, you don't know.
The Iacobucci report suggests, once again, that the three persons mentioned be offered the same apologies as those made to Mr. Arar. Was the RCMP consulted or does it have a role to play in preparing those apologies? If so, has that been done?