What is the impact of a publication ban on sexual assault cases?

As noted by Lamer C.J. in Dagenais v. Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (1994), 1994 CanLII 39 (SCC), 94 C.C.C. (3d) 289 (S.C.C.) at 320: Third, the analysis of publication bans should be much richer than the clash model suggests. Rather than simply focusing on the fact that bans always limit freedom of expression and usually aim to protect the right to a fair trial of the accused, it should be recognized that ordering bans may: • limit freedom of expression (and thus undercut the purposes of section 2(b) discussed above), • prevent the jury from being influenced by information other than that presented in evidence during the trial (for example, information presented in a tabloid television show and evidence discussed in the absence of the jury and held to be inadmissible); • maximize the chances that witnesses will testify because they will not be fearful of the consequences of publicity; • protect vulnerable witnesses (for example, child witnesses, police informants, and victims of sexual offences); • preserve the privacy of individuals involved in the criminal process (for example the accused and his or her family as well as the victims and the witnesses and the families); • maximize the chances of rehabilitation for “young offenders”; • encourage the reporting of sexual offences; • save the financial and/or emotional costs to the state, the accused, the victims and witnesses of the alternatives to publication bans (for example, delaying trials changing venues, and challenging jurors for cause), and • protect national security.