The two versions obviously refer to the same thing. What we understand from the amendment proposed by Mr. Ménard is that the text would essentially say that the judge rely, in deciding whether the certificate is reasonable, on reliable evidence, with the exception of evidence obtained under torture.
That suggests that information obtained under torture can be otherwise reliable. In our view, a statement obtained under torture is not reliable. The proposal made by Mr. MacKenzie achieves essentially the same goal by specifying that unreliable information includes statements obtained under torture.