"Witness anonymity a panacea or Pandora's box": "Witness anonymity a panacea or Pandora's box": "W...

"Witness anonymity a panacea or Pandora's box": "Witness anonymity a panacea or Pandora's box": "W...: "Witness anonymity a panacea or Pandora's box": "Witness anonymity"has been a hot topic today amon... : " W itness anonymity"has been a hot ...

"Witness anonymity a panacea or Pandora's box": "Witness anonymity"has been a hot topic today amon...

"Witness anonymity a panacea or Pandora's box": "Witness anonymity"has been a hot topic today amon...: " W itness anonymity"has been a hot topic today among the Criminal law academia.Its significance largely increases particularly in the sce...

"Witness anonymity"has been a hot topic today among the Criminal law academia.Its significance largely increases particularly in the scenario of Terrorism trials going on in different parts of the world.Here I'd like to kindle a heated discussion in this  regard , of keeping the witness anonymous for their protection.How far this practice  infringes the right of the accused to Confront his accuser.Whether the counter balancing measures are effective enough to protect the rights of the accused.The terminology "Confrontation "has been interpreted in different way.However my question is whether it is "effective cross examination "the thing which "Confrontation"Clause is canvasing for or any other "process"rights?
 The reason behind the incorporation of confrontation clause in the Sixth Amendment of the U.S Constitution is to ensure  fairness in the trial process by guaranteeing  every defendant an equal opportunity to present his case. If the defendant had no opportunity to see his accuser ,how could he effectively cross examine the witnesses against him? If this is the case ,the concept of a "fair trial" will be in peril.