Au sujet de ce libellé, voici ma question : si l'avocat participe à une transaction suspecte, mais non à titre d'avocat, il ne va certainement pas le rapporter à quiconque, puisqu'il participe à cette transaction, et on peut alors se demander à quoi peut bien servir le nouvel article 10.1.
My question in terms of that drafting is the following: If the lawyer, not as a lawyer but as something else, is participating in a suspicious transaction, he or she is not about to divulge to anybody that he or she is participating in that transaction, therefore, of what utility, when all is said and done, is proposed new section 10.1?