I would say this is a protective principle at large: The more information we have about individuals the more it provides whoever is responsible...so they can do every part of it and have more time to do the checks that might be necessary. Clearly, we have to establish protocols for how we do it, and respect the protocols.
One thing we see sometimes in security is this: Things happen on paper. We agree on protocols. However, when the rubber hits the road, not all of those protocols are respected to the extent they were. A lot of thought is generally put into those protocols. Cutting those protocols clearly puts us at greater risk.
In this case, the establishment of protocols in terms of having the names early enough to provide the time to do it.... We don't bypass those protocols.