The South African Institute of Race Relations (SAIRR) is supporting a move by Freedom Under Law (FUL) to challenge the handling of the complaint against Western Cape Judge President John Hlophe.

"The Judicial Service Commission decision has left a number of serious concerns hanging over the conduct of Judge Hlophe or alternatively that of certain Constitutional Court justices," the institute's deputy CEO Frans Cronje said in a statement on Tuesday.

"We support the FUL challenge as supremacy of the rule of law depends heavily on respect for the institutions responsible for applying and interpreting the law."

Last month the JSC said it would not proceed with an investigation against Hlophe for gross misconduct, following a complaint by two judges last May that he approached them about the now-abandoned corruption case against Jacob Zuma, before he became President.

The JSC had recognised there was a conflict of fact between the Constitutional Court judges' version of events on the one hand and Judge Hlophe's on the other, but said it would be pointless to cross-examine the parties because they would stick to their stories.

Cronje found this explanation "extraordinary".

"This decision has left questions over the good standing of all parties involved, including the JSC, the Constitutional Court justices and Judge Hlophe. It cannot go unchallenged."

Cronje said the institute was concerned at two further developments surrounding the Hlophe saga.

The first concerned the "political restructuring" of the JSC that preceded the setting aside of the complaint against Hlophe.

"It could appear to some observers as if Judge Hlophe failed to cooperate with the JSC just long enough for the Zuma administration to restructure the JSC."

He said the Justice Minister further intervened to delay the Hlophe hearing so the restructuring of the JSC could be completed.

"That politically restructured JSC then came to its finding on Judge Hlophe. This chronology has all the trappings of political interference in judicial processes and has serious implications for judicial independence and for the rule of law."

The second was the "open and aggressive display of crude racial solidarity" by many Hlophe supporters, he said.

Last week's announcement by FUL - a body that promotes democracy under law, headed by former Constitutional Court judge Johann Kriegler - that it would challenge the JSC's decision, precipitated an "unwarranted series of racist insinuations".

Black South Africans supporting the challenge had been called "house negroes" and made out to be no different to apartheid collaborators.

"These accusations are nonsensical as many of the most senior and respected judges in the country are black."

Cronje said in questioning the JSC's decision, the institute was holding Hlophe to the same high standard as society held all judges.

"This is neither racist nor patronising as some transformation advocates have suggested in the media. It is in fact the opposite. This is a case where keeping quiet would amount to holding a black judge to a lower standard," he said.