Justice Minister Irwin Cotler was grilled Wednesday on the two nominees for the Supreme Court of Canada and the process that led to the choices.

In his opening remarks to the ad hoc panel of MPs and legal experts, Cotler admitted there has been a lack of transparency in the appointment process. "This is what we are seeking to reform and to rectify."

However, he called the vetting process "the right balance" between transparency and expediency.

He also called Prime Minister Paul Martin's two candidates, Ontario Appeal Court Justices Rosalie Abella and Louise Charron, "outstanding jurists who will make a significant and lasting contribution."

The committee was set up as a first step to accommodating Martin's promises of more transparency in his government.

But the fact it has no power to approve or veto candidates appointment to the top court bench has left many accusing the government of mounting a sideshow.

As the review proceeded Wednesday morning, Opposition MPs openly vented their frustration.

Conservative justice critic and panel member Vic Toews was the first to ask questions and to air complaints.

Telling the Justice Minister he was disappointed the candidates weren't appearing in person, Toews said he wants them to answer the fundamental question: "Why do you believe you are qualified for this eminent position?"

"This promise of transparency appears to have been abandoned for what in fact is a rubber-stamp process, an afterthought rather that a genuine consultation," he said.

Cotler attempted to respond that this was the process agreed upon by all the parties in the House, but was interrupted by Toews. At that point, things got a little heated.

"I could not ask them because there were these rules of procedure understood and agreed to by all the parties that only the minister of justice would come before this committee," he said.

"How could I then breach that agreement ... after your party had agreed that the nominees wouldn't come? Now that's astounding."

Toews also complained the process had been "haphazard and rushed." Cotler said they needed to fill the two vacant positions quickly -- before the fall session starts.

The panel will issue a report on Friday but it will be non-binding. The findings will be strictly advisory, with the Prime Minister remaining the sole authority to pick Supreme Court judges.

Abella and Charron's appointments will be finalized after the report is filed.

This is the first time that MPs are being allowed to vet Supreme Court nominees. However, opposition MPs say the process doesn't go far enough.

The appointments of Abella and Charron will bring the number of women on the nine-member high court to four.

Their nominations come just six weeks before the high court is back in session. One of the main topics expected to be discussed this year is same-sex marriage.

Charron wrote a ground-breaking ruling for the Appeal Court, striking down the heterosexual definition of spouse in Ontario's Family Law Act, and allowing same-sex couples to marry.

Charron, 53, earned her law degree at the University of Ottawa in 1975 and was called to the bar in 1977. She practised civil litigation and was also assistant Crown attorney for the Judicial District of Ottawa-Carleton from 1980 to 1985.

She was appointed to the District Court of Ontario in 1988, and named to the Ontario Court of Appeal in 1995.

Abella, 58, came to Canada at the age of four with her parents, who were Holocaust survivors.

She graduated from the University of Toronto law school in 1970. Abella practised civil and criminal litigation, and was appointed to the Ontario Family Court in 1976, at the age of 29 and seven months pregnant. In 1992, she was appointed to the Ontario Court of Appeal.

The vacancies were created when Louise Arbour accepted the post of United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights in June, and Frank Iacobucci retired.

With files from The Canadian Press