The judges of the Constitutional Court publicised a misconduct allegation against Cape Judge President John Hlophe in the interests of justice and transparency, Chief Justice Pius Langa said on Tuesday.

"It was considered to be a matter of extreme public interest," Langa told a Judicial Service Commission (JSC) hearing in Johannesburg which continued late into Tuesday evening.

"It was felt that it was in the public interest to deal with the matter quickly and advise all the parties concerned quickly and the method of publishing a media statement came about in that way."

The JSC is investigating a complaint that last year Hlophe tried to influence two Constitutional Court judges ? Bess Nkabinde and Chris Jafta ? in a judgment involving presidential front-runner Jacob Zuma, who was at that stage still facing charges of fraud and corruption.

In turn, Hlophe has laid a complaint against the judges of the Constitutional Court, saying they infringed on his rights by releasing a media statement on the allegation against him without giving him the opportunity to respond.

"This is an issue where I still believe transparency would serve the call of justice," said Langa.

Langa said he phoned Hlophe to inform him of the complaint against the JSC but did not tell him that a media statement would be released on the matter.

Asked what Hlophe's response was to the complaint, Langa said: "He did not deny it. He said, ?well, I will respond'. That was it."

Langa told the JSC how the incident had distressed the two Constitutional Court judges involved.

"This was a distressing matter to them - it was not something they were very excited about."

Langa said the two judges did not want to be the only complainants in the matter, but denied that they had been manipulated into laying the complaint.

"We did not manipulate them."

He considered it his duty to inform the JSC of the incident.

"I did not have a political motive at all. I thought the issue of what the JSC would do, would be up to the JSC ? I did not have a desire to have Judge President Hlophe impeached.

"This was a painful matter to me. I am aware that in the history of the judiciary in South Africa there's probably not an impeachment. I have no ulterior motives against the Judge President," said Langa.

A difficult situation

Deputy chief justice Dikgang Moseneke said it was a very difficult situation to deal with.

"It was arguably the most difficult [situation] myself and the rest of the judges of the court had to confront," said Moseneke who took the stand after Langa.

"The challenge was to find an optimal approach in laying a complaint." The judges did not want the parties involved in the Zuma case to feel compromised, said Moseneke.

The Constitutional Court judges felt "it would be inappropriate for the complaint to find its way to the public space in any other way than pronounced by ourselves".

"Our own honest assessment was that we were not obliged to give the Judge President a hearing ? that part resides with this body [the JSC] ? which is properly suited and empowered to investigate this complaint and pronounce on it. We were no more than complainants," said Moseneke.

Asked to respond to a claim by Hlophe that Moseneke and Langa were out to destroy him, the deputy chief justice said he was saddened by such an accusation.

"It?s an allegation which weighs very heavily with me. I always hoped that his career would flourish."

Moseneke also rejected allegations that he had been involved in a political conspiracy against Zuma and that they enjoyed a cordial relationship.

"I find the accusations... unhelpful," said Moseneke.

Moseneke was asked why Hlophe had not been given more time to respond to the allegation before the media statement was released.

"They considered the allegations to be serious... in time Judge President would have had the unmitigated opportunity to put forward his version."

Langa confirmed he had been involved in investigations following allegations of racism by Hlophe in the past, but said that had been resolved long ago.

Moseneke also responded to accusations of bias from Hlophe following the so-called racism report.

"In the better part of my life I have fought against racism. I think it is unfair to suggest that I would want to support racism in any form whatsoever and the Judge President must know that," said Moseneke.

Langa and Moseneke started testifying late afternoon after several delays in the hearing during the day.

Hlophe's lawyers requested a postponement, saying he was still sick, the same reason for a postponement last week.

Hlophe was not ready to testify or "participate meaningfully" in the hearing because his symptoms had not "completely abated", his lawyer Vuyani Ngalwana told the JSC.

But JSC committee chair, Judge Lex Mpati, ruled that the hearing should continue in his absence.

Ngalwana then withdrew from the case.

"He [Hlophe] won't be able to be here tomorrow, he won't be able to be here the day after... it would not be in his best interests for us to represent him in his absence. The best way we can represent our client is by withdrawing from the matter," said Ngalwana.

The JSC nevertheless decided to continue with the hearing which had been postponed more than once since last year, due to several court applications in the matter.

The last ruling was made by the Supreme Court of Appeal, in favour of the judges of the Constitutional Court.

Hlophe has said he would appeal the ruling by the SCA that his rights had not been infringed upon, but that would mean a recusal of all the judges of the Constitutional Court. In this case, the SCA judgment would stand.

The hearings continue on Wednesday at 9am.