Justice committee  Yes, exactly. That's, of course, a benefit that the accused receives, in the context of sexual assault cases, that is unique in the Criminal Code, so survivors who have the ban lifted in those circumstances are very brave.

Justice committee  Yes, you could. There is a section in here that speaks to the intent and about prosecuting the complainant and what would be required to do so, which I think just restates the law as it presently exists. However, you could also carve out exceptions and circumstances under which someone should never be prosecuted.

Justice committee  Yes, exactly.

Justice committee  I'm strongly in favour of independent advice because the meaning of “broadcast”, “transmit” or “distribute” has become more complex with the arising of social media. For example, on the Department of Justice's website, on the page about publication bans, they actually have something that's incorrect in advising complainants, saying that they can't talk about the publication ban with reporters.

Justice committee  I think it has. I'm a little nervous being at the committee. I'm not as used to it as you all are.

Justice committee  I was here that day as well, and I think the Department of Justice official, answering quite correctly in his role as Crown, wanted to give you very specific and precise answers. They don't keep those statistics, but if you had statistics for the number of sexual assault charges, then you would have the answer to that question because they are imposed in each and every case at the earliest opportunity.

Justice committee  I think the complainant is generally notified in and around the time they come to court to testify. If the case is resolved before there's any testimony given, the complainant isn't notified of the publication ban. I speak to that on the basis of my experience representing complainants, but also in my own case.

Justice committee  You are correct.

Justice committee  Yes, exactly. I've represented some of those people, and we've often had a very difficult time trying to find out whether there's a publication ban at all. Sometimes we have to resort to ordering transcripts of every appearance at the cost of the complainant.

Justice committee  I think there's a bit of a misunderstanding—and I think C.L.'s prosecution, unfortunately, increased that—about what actually constitutes breaching the publication ban. People are often given advice, because of her case, not to speak to anyone about it. For example, after our testimony two weeks ago, we were here with survivors.

Justice committee  We'd be happy to do that.

Justice committee  I will answer you in English if you'll allow. Thank you. I'm just going to turn to proposed subsection 486.4(3.2) in the legislation, and, just in the very simplest of ways, eliminate one problem but not solve the other. You can simply delete the section that says the prosecutor has to advise of the ban's “effects and the circumstances in which they may disclose information that is subject to the order”.

Justice committee  I actually agree with Professor Fehr. I think that it would be constitutional if you limited it that way. In fact, I could just refer back to, ironically, an old case, the 1988 Canadian Newspapers' case that I referred to in my...but in a different context, where there was a really specific reason for a removal of discretion, because that was the issue in that case—the discretionary nature of the ban versus mandatory.

Justice committee  I would commend her entire paper to you, not just that singular page.

Justice committee  I guess it depends on how far you're going when you do your line-by-line amendments. We have all spoken about the need for robust or at least funded legal counsel for complainants. Right now, people like Ms. Stephens and I are volunteers. We're both sole practitioners, so our ability to serve in that capacity is quite limited for very practical reasons.