Attorney General Chris Bentley has determined – "after careful consideration of the factors" – that two wrongly convicted men should not receive compensation for the years they spent behind bars.

What factors are those? We don't know. We should.

What we are being told is that the cases of Robert Baltovich and Anthony Hanemaayer are not "rare and unusual" enough to warrant compensation. Baltovich served eight years after being wrongly convicted of murdering his girlfriend. Hanemaayer, fearing a longer sentence, pleaded guilty to a sexual assault that was actually committed by serial killer Paul Bernardo. Both were acquitted in 2008.

Bentley has pointed to Steven Truscott's case for meeting the "unusual" criteria, including "a finding of factual innocence."

But that is not what the court determined in 2007 when it acquitted Truscott, who was convicted and sentenced to hang at 14 for the murder of a classmate. It is also not the standard in half a dozen other cases where provincial governments have awarded compensation for wrongful convictions.

Wrongful convictions undermine confidence in our justice system, and Bentley's answers have not helped in this respect. He has failed to explain clearly why these men should not be compensated. Baltovich and Hanemaayer, who will now be forced to pursue compensation in the civil courts, deserve better answers. So do Ontarians.

Bentley should make a considered statement informing the public exactly what criteria were used to determine that these men were unworthy of compensation. Such decisions ought not to be based on the whim of the attorney general of the day or on public opinion polls but on clearly articulated principles.