Thank you, Mr. Chair.
This is dealing with a proposed section that we find on page 111, dealing with the process before a judge in looking at the issuance of a warrant, the collection of information, and so on.
What we're trying to do here is to ensure that when issues of charter rights are being adjudicated—and this is essentially a very private and secret hearing before one judge alone, and it may never be subject to an appeal—we're inserting into the section the presence of a special advocate.
A special advocate, of course, is present, from the Chrétien era changes to anti-terrorism legislation, when security certificates are issued. The special advocate is there obviously not in the interest of any accused, because the accused can't know about the hearings against them, in this case for the issuance of a warrant. Obviously, you don't want to have the person under suspicion notified of the proceeding. That's why it's ex parte and why it's secret. But the public interest should be represented. In this case, the public interest would be represented by a special advocate.
This was recommended by the Canadian Civil Liberties Association as well as by Professor Michael Nesbitt. I think it's appropriate that we import into this section the presence of a special advocate.