I think that our amendment, which follows this and amends another part of the same page, perhaps is broader.
I understand the worry about derivative evidence. I don't believe that either Mr. Ménard's amendment or ours prevents the law enforcement authorities from pursuing issues of investigation based on whatever information they have. It may impact on the admissibility of the evidence in a court of law, but that's up to a court to decide. All we're saying is that evidence that has been obtained as a result of torture isn't admissible. We want to make that explicit here. I don't believe we're impacting, with either his amendment or our amendment, the derivative evidence that you're talking about.