Three Coalition Government ministers have withdrawn some statements but refused to apologise to the Victorian Court of Appeal for criticising the state's judiciary over terrorism sentences.

Key points: Commonwealth Solicitor General says ministers regret use of some language

Commonwealth Solicitor General says ministers regret use of some language Ministers retract comments relating to "hard-left activist judges"

Ministers retract comments relating to "hard-left activist judges" Chief Justice Marilyn Warren says ministers' statements failed to respect separation of powers

Human Services Minister Alan Tudge, Health Minister Greg Hunt and Assistant Treasurer Michael Sukkar have been asked to explain why they should not be charged with contempt of court, over comments they made in an article published in The Australian newspaper on Tuesday.

Commonwealth Solicitor-General Stephen Donaghue QC told a hearing on Friday that in retrospect, the ministers regretted the use of some language but "did it to participate in what [they] considered to be an important public discussion" about terrorism sentences.

"[They] did not intend to undermine public confidence in the courts … the remarks were made in good faith and in an attempt to discharge [their] duties," he told the court.

When Justice Weinberg told Mr Donaghue "I haven't heard them apologise", he responded "You have heard regret as to the choice of language".

Justice Weinberg retorted: "It's not the same thing, is it?"

However, after repeated questioning by the three judges, Mr Donaghue said his "instructions had evolved somewhat" and the ministers would retract three comments relating to "hard-left activist judges", conducting "ideological experiments" and suggestions the courts were "divorced from reality".

'Speaking in total ignorance'

Justice Mark Weinberg said the court had been placed in an "embarrassing, invidious position".

He said should the judiciary determine appeals are to be dismissed, they may be accused of conducting an ideological experiment, and if they increased sentences, they may appear to have been influenced by ministers of the crown.

He asked whether the ministers had "any idea at all" as to the kinds of sentences, or appreciation of the complex issues before the court.

Justice Stephen Kaye then asked, "So they were speaking in total ignorance?"

Mr Donoghue responded: "They were speaking in response to what they knew from a press report."

"Well, that sounds to me like total ignorance," Justice Kaye replied.

In stark contrast, the lawyer for The Australian newspaper issued a full apology and told the court the organisation was "just the messenger".

The case was adjourned and the judges will decide at a date yet to be fixed on whether to press ahead with contempt charges.

Laws 'protect the independence of the judiciary'

At the start of the hearing, Chief Justice Marilyn Warren said the court was concerned the statements were "improperly made in an attempt to influence the court in its … decisions" in relation to two appeals against terrorism sentences the court had been considering.

"That is by being calculated to improperly undermine public confidence in the administration of justice in this state," she said.

"We would add, in the strongest terms, the legal notions of contempt of court do not exist to protect judges or their personal reputations.

"These laws exist to protect the independence of the judiciary in making decisions that bind governments and citizens alike."

She added the statements failed to respect the doctrine of the separation of powers and reflected a lack of proper understanding of the importance of the independence of the judiciary from the political arms of government.

Justice Warren assured Victorians judges would decide the cases before them "independently, impartially and in accordance with the rule of law".

Shadow attorney-general Mark Dreyfus said it was "encouraging" that the ministers are recognising the seriousness of the situation.

"Just yesterday, Prime Minister Turnbull backed in his comments of his ministers, despite strong condemnation from the nation's judges and legal profession," he said.

"Now those same ministers have retracted some, though not all, of their comments.

"While highly embarrassing for Mr Turnbull it is encouraging the ministers are beginning to realise the seriousness of their situation."