No. Subsection 15(1) of the act stipulates that discretionary exemptions can only be granted if disclosure would be injurious. In the annual report that will be distributed this morning—I know that you have not yet had time to read it—we refer to a similar case. No two cases are ever identical, but section 15 was invoked in the Maher Arar case. The report states the following with regard to invoking subsection 15(1) as a basis for saying no—and not just because of the word "torture"—:
...it must be borne in mind that speculative fears of possible injury from disclosure are insufficient. There must be a reasonable expectation, at the level of a probability, that injury to the intelligence or enforcement activity will result.