In welcoming the NPA's decision to formally charge Jacob Zuma with rape, his colleagues in the ANC Women's League issued the strongest statement condemning women abuse and emphasising their support for the alleged victim.

The announcement, which ended weeks of intense speculation around the saga, has been dubbed by political commentators as the "final nail in the coffin" for Zuma's political career and ambitions.

But while it is rightfully submitted that the decision to finally press the charges suggests the existence of a prima facie case against the former deputy president, it may be argued by conspiracy theorists that the reasons why the case dragged for so long before charges were formally brought, confirms that our criminal justice system is amenable to abuse by those who have dubious intentions.

It is not ideal in an open democratic society where the media, in its pursuit of informing the public, compromises the rights of individuals, irrespective of their standing in the community.

While it is common cause that the formal charges against Zuma do not necessarily make him guilty of rape, it is interesting to note how the preceding events have shaped public opinion on the matter.

Throughout the week, gender activists and pro-women organisations have correctly advocated for the shift in the tone of the current debate. They have insisted that it is the alleged victim and not the political victim (Zuma) that deserves protection and public sympathy. This view, however, presupposes the guilt of the accused.

In the same way as Zuma's absolute denial should not be readily accepted as correct, the inherent possibility that the complainant may be fabricating the allegations should not be easily dismissed.

It is such competing societal interest that characterises this case that will keep the public divided in its debate. The Zuma saga happened in the middle of the 16 Day of Activism campaign against women and child abuse.

It is interesting to see how we as a country maintain the balance between our commitment against rape and abuse on the one hand, and the rights of individuals on the other.

It must be remembered that, whatever the outcome of this case, rape allegations can be damning to the individual in question.

To the extent that our country takes sexual offence complaints so seriously, many innocent men, regardless of their standing in the community, sometimes find themselves in custody without bail.

Perhaps, Jacob Zuma and Benedict Vilakazi are the fortunate ones who are treated differently because of who they are?

The general principle underlying the independence of our judicial system is that every investigation must be free from interference.

Justice requires that the rights of those accused of crimes be protected until such time that impartial forums adjudicate on those allegations.

Masombuka is a lawyer

With acknowledgements to Thabo Masombuka and City Press.