I have a point of order on procedure. It has to do with this sub judice argument, in that you have afforded certain witnesses the ability to use the sub judice argument to not answer questions, but you have not afforded it to others. So far you've only said that Monsieur Mayrand had that privilege. I'm hearing today that there's another witness or group of witnesses that has the same privilege.
On procedure, have you afforded that privilege to witnesses other than Monsieur Mayrand?