Two Constitutional Court justices have gone to their own court to ask their colleagues to make a ruling on a case involving Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe and several other sitting judges. This is the latest turn of events in an eight-year-old saga involving a complaint against Hlophe lodged by several present and former members of the Constitutional Court over his alleged attempts to influence the court in a case involving President Jacob Zuma.The Judicial Service Commission, which appoints and disciplines judges, had looked into the complaint against Hlophe under its old rules. He was cleared but civil society groups went to court to demand the matter be looked at again. That case made it to the Supreme Court of Appeal, which ruled that the initial investigation had not tackled the issue correctly.Now several years later, Judge Bess Nkabinde and Judge Chris Jafta have come knocking on the door of their own court, complaining about the renewed bid to investigate Hlophe under new rules adopted by the JSC. Hlophe inquiry can go ahead as appeal by two judges failsThe Supreme Court of Appeal on Thursday dismissed the appeal by two justices of the Constitutional Court who had expressed concerns about the legality of a tribunal investigating Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe.They have argued that the Supreme Court of Appeal's ''focus on us as persons within the judiciary clouded its judgment"."This view is fortified by the fact the SCA suggested indirectly that we lack integrity. It warned us that we should strive to conduct ourselves in a way that will sustain and contribute to public respect,'' Nkabinde said in an affidavit before the court that is supported by Jafta.''These remarks were made when there was not even an iota of evidence that public confidence has been eroded as a result of our actions and the issues raised before it. None of the parties alleged that our conduct was unbecoming of judges. None of the parties suggested we lack integrity."As judges we have taken an oath in terms of the constitution to uphold the constitution and the laws of the Republic."How the SCA decided to make those conclusions, hurtful and unwarranted imputations which have far-reaching implications, boggles the mind," the affidavit said.In their original complaint, 11 judges of the Constitutional Court said Judge Hlophe had approached Nkabinde and Jafta and discussed how the court should rule in a matter linked to the corruption case involving Zuma.However, Nkabinde and Jafta have both been reluctant to testify in new proceedings against Hlophe, and the hearings have stalled.In her affidavit, Nkabinde questioned the JSC's decision to use a prosecutor in its conduct tribunal proceedings, as well as the fact the new Judicial Service Commission Act has been used to deal with a complaint that came into being before the act was amended.The judges question the constitutionality of act, saying it gives powers to the minister of justice that would violate the principle of the separation of powers...