The main criticism in the judgment is about our breach of the duty of candour. I don't think there's any misunderstanding in the department or in CSIS that we have to do better. I think what the court is telling us is that for certain decisions that they're going to make, like the decision to issue a warrant, they want some more context, so we have to be careful that we are giving them enough context so they can make a proper decision. We have to make sure that all of our people are aware of that duty, both the affiants from CSIS and the lawyers presenting the case to the court. We are taking advice from outside experts on how we can do better by looking at best practices in ex parte matters in other jurisdictions.
On December 8th, 2016. See this statement in context.