Drawing on a few things, the test is well established, including within the various testimonial aid provisions within the Criminal Code. This is very well established, as Madame Boivin pointed out. Proposed subsection 486.31(3) articulates the different criteria that a court will be guided by in making its determination.
When we appeared initially on this, the question was asked, and I made reference to some case law that had already proceeded with this; courts have made the order using a common law power. The example given was that the victim didn't want the name or identity known to the accused. The name of the person who was testifying, the complainant, was still written down; the court knew. The court could set whatever criteria are important based on the facts of the case. Should the name be disclosed to the lawyer for the accused but not disclosed to the accused? Again, the court has the tools, as proposed by this provision, using a well-established test, to set conditions that would be appropriate and that will safeguard the open principle—the accused's rights—in the circumstances.