I agree with Mr. Godin that in camera means in camera. We could have serious problems if comments or confidences exchanged during an in camera meeting were disclosed and this turned against us. No one would dare say anything any more. We wouldn't have any more witnesses, since they would always feel the sword of Damocles hanging over their heads. Witnesses, as well as ourselves, must have the assurance that in camera means in camera.
For one reason or another, an individual may believe that a fact is sufficiently serious to require disclosure at any cost. The expression speaks for itself: we are talking about comments made behind closed doors. This principle must be respected. There shouldn't even be anyone here other than ourselves. Our in camera deliberations should be really just amongst ourselves.
An exception was made with regard to Mr. Guité. In such cases, when we realize that a serious mistake has been made and we wonder whom to turn to for advice or permission to publish in camera material, I think we need to adopt a procedure based on unanimity. In order to make in camera meetings public, we must ensure that a deliberate choice is made and that someone supports us, be it with regard to a document, a witness or ourselves. As Yvon said, we must also protect ourselves.