Yes, absolutely, it helps us. That is what determines whether we can lay charges or not. For example, if the first victim testifies in her own case that she was kidnapped and that the five other victims were also in the same situation, then she can explain the context and the circumstances. We will not only use those statements but will also use other evidence such as physical surveillance and wiretapping. There are many investigative techniques that will allow us to lay charges even if the victims refuse to testify or do not want to testify. That is what presumption gives us.
I would like to add one thing that I forgot to speak about earlier and that I would like you to consider. We're talking about consecutive sentences. This is interesting in a case involving several victims. Currently, if an individual is convicted for that offence, regardless of whether there were one, three, four or six victims, the sentence is the same: the individual will be given a five-year sentence. Are we not giving an advantage to the offender, and does it not encourage them to create more victims, for example five or six, given that there won't be a harsher sentence?