The bottom line is that when discussions were being had between myself and the Judge Advocate General at the time with respect to specific high-profile cases, and this was more in the form of informing him as opposed to seeking instruction from him, I always knew that ultimately, if we disagreed, we could agree to disagree, but I had and would make that direction public.
En définitive, si le juge-avocat général et moi avions des discussions concernant des affaires très médiatisées — et je le faisais plutôt pour le renseigner que pour obtenir des instructions de sa part — je savais toujours qu'au bout du compte, si nous ne tombions pas d'accord, nous pouvions rester sur nos positions, et je rendais les directives publiques.