More importantly, he argued that since the documents in question are already the subject of ongoing litigation before the Federal Court of Appeal, the committee was effectively trying to substitute its decision for that of the courts and, in doing so, had offended the sub judice convention and the constitutional principle of the separation of powers between the legislature and the judiciary.
Surtout, il a soutenu que puisque les documents en question faisaient déjà l’objet d’un litige devant la Cour d’appel fédérale, le comité essayait dans les faits de substituer sa décision à celle des tribunaux, contrevenant ainsi à la convention relative aux affaires en instance judiciaire et au principe constitutionnel de la séparation des pouvoirs législatif et judiciaire.