Article content continued

The Globe and Mail reported that “a number” of judges were drawn from the second tier of candidates.

Murray Rankin, the NDP justice critic, said he didn’t understand why the Liberals couldn’t provide more aggregate data.

“I’m not entirely sure why we couldn’t know, why we’re not entitled to know, how often the minister is dipping into the merely ‘recommended’ as opposed to the ‘highly recommended’ pool,” he said.

In a statement released through her office, Wilson-Raybould said when she makes judicial appointments, she considers a number of factors, including their expertise, the needs of the court and the strength of their application.

“Whether someone is recommended or highly recommended is one factor that I take into account, among many important considerations, in exercising my prerogative to appoint the best candidates to the judiciary.”

An official from her office would not confirm whether judges were indeed drawn from the “recommended” pool of candidates. But the official said a prospective judge’s expertise might be one reason why someone would be drawn from one pool rather than the other.

If someone is required who is really strong in family law or in wills and estates, “you need to find somebody to fit that bill.” That might mean pulling someone from the list of “recommended” judges, if none in the “highly recommended” pile are specifically qualified in that area.

The official rejected any suggestion that “recommended” judges are somehow not qualified.