Absolutely, and the issue of factual innocence or actual innocence is a real problem in this area of the law. Article 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights does not require factual innocence for compensation to be pursued. The FPT guidelines that Canada adopted in 1988 do, in fact, require factual innocence, so there's a dichotomy between what Canada has put in place and what the United Nations has asked it to put in place.
The recommendation you'll see in Justice LaForme and Justice Westmoreland-Traoré's report is that a statute be put in place with respect to compensation and that it not require factual innocence. In a liberal democratic society, that's probably the appropriate way to go. Factual innocence is not something that a trial court determines. There is no finding of innocence in court. You're guilty or not guilty, so there's no finding of innocence. To impose upon somebody, in order to qualify for the compensation, that they have to somehow prove something that has never been proven before in their case is a burden that is troublesome.
Steven Truscott could never have proven factual innocence and, as a function of that, never received the compensation that the public inquiry awarded him.