That is a concern as well, but let's say there's information in front of a Federal Court judge, and there's an individual who's potentially going to be detained under a security certificate. The lawyer for the detainee says this information in front of the judge was derived by torture. Let's say there's no debate around that, that everyone agrees. But because the information was obtained under torture, that led the authorities to collect some evidence that was not hearsay evidence or unsubstantiated but evidence that clearly linked this particular person to some terrorist activities or involvement. A clever lawyer might say that evidence was derivative, it was obtained indirectly or directly by torture, so it's not admissible to the judge.
That's my concern. Could that happen?