It is a good question. I would respond in two ways. The first way is to have regard to the wording of the offence itself, 279.03.
As you said, these are practices that are used by traffickers to compel their victims to provide labour services, to exploit them. It's a control tactic, and the offence as drafted links that conduct to the exploitative purpose. So the withholding of the documents, the destroying of the documents, has to be done for the purpose of facilitating the trafficking of persons. I think that, on a first principle, would likely exclude most cases you've described, as I've understood it, because if the victim was told, you must destroy this passport, I think it's fair to say that they're not doing it for the purpose of trafficking in persons; they're doing it because they're fearful for their safety.
To the extent that there would be another situation where theoretically that offence might apply, and we are dealing with a victim, we would look to discretion not to lay a charge, either by a police officer or a prosecutor, and you've heard testimony already today about how the RCMP and Ms. Nagy and others are training police officers to better respond to those situations.
Does that help?