When I talked about inaccurate information, there was that story about that other Canadian that came out around the same time, which suggested that after 38 years of being banned, so being on the Indian blacklist, he had been able to come to India because he was in the Prime Minister's delegation. I can tell you that the paper will show that this gentleman was not in the Prime Minister's delegation.
In the same way, when the media in India talked about Mr. Atwal—and initially our media as well—he was being presented as what he was 30 years ago, but at the same time, when we understand India.... You understand that I have a huge experience in immigration and the foreign services that serve abroad. India is one of our main source countries. I understand the whole blacklist Indian interdiction process. The minute we saw that Mr. Atwal was in India, we said, well, if he is in India, that means that somehow they have pruned his name off the blacklist. We started to get some information suggesting that indeed he had travelled to India in August 2017. We have open source information showing that. Also, he actually had received a political decoration in India in August 2017, so we have to assume that somehow the Indian government had removed him.
As you probably know, their initial reaction was that they weren't sure. They checked it out. On the 24th, senior Indian officials, in the same kind of background briefing that I gave, told Indian newspapers that indeed he had been removed. In their process, people meet with diplomats and with intelligence officers and all that, and on March 9 they confirmed that on the record.