Can I ask your opinion of clause 17? I know Mr. Gottardi and a friend from the crown have mentioned clause 17. Of course, the whole issue is the disclosure of the identity of the informant—or the victim in some cases—and a fair trial.
You deal with many vulnerable witnesses and victims. I'm looking at clause 17. It seems to me that it would be a very extreme situation in which this type of a remedy would be granted. It requires a special application. The parameters seem to be, for the judge to grant this special application where the identity is not disclosed, that there be the right to a fair and public hearing, and whether effective alternatives to making the proposed orders are available. It would be something used very leniently, almost as in the protection of someone's life, to combat a very horrific crime. We can easily think of a situation in which you have a police informant, the information is sacred, and if his or her identity gets compromised it could lead to death.
We had Ms. Nagy who came to testify. She was a victim of human trafficking. When she confronted her perpetrators, the brother of the accused was in the court going like this, signifying: if you keep going, I'm going to cut your throat.
Although it's controversial, what's your perspective on this clause?