The injustice to which Jacob Zuma has been subjected by the prosecuting authorities and the media has now reached a point where it violates my sense of fair play.

He is parodied, besmirched and denigrated as all that is distasteful and even disgusting in society and politics. When I do a soul search to find justifiable reasons for this, the only proven transgression I can find is the fact that, with a layman's naivete on matters medical, he took a shower after unprotected sex to "cleanse himself" and prevent transmission of disease.

Foolish as it may seem to us who believe we know better, is this a crime? And which one of us has not done this sometime, simply to freshen up after passionate intercourse?

But let's have a look at his other "transgressions".

Judge Hilary Squires, on finding Schabir Shaik guilty of corruption, stated that a corrupt relationship existed between Shaik and Zuma.

He appears to have done this primarily on the basis of a letter sent by Zuma to Gavin Woods, the chairman of the parliamentary Standing Committee on Public Accounts (Scopa), to question its decision to investigate the background to the awarding of armament contracts.

Zuma was not on trial and subsequently it emerged that President Thabo Mbeki had "sanctioned" the letter.

To me this means that he saw the letter and sanction is tantamount to affixing his signature to it.

We have also heard Mbeki's office tango around the question of whether he met Thomson CSF (now Thales) in December 1998. (I was a High Commissioner for South Africa from 1995 to 1999. I can tell you exactly whom I met, for what reason and for each and every day of that time. Does a Deputy President not keep a diary?)

On the basis of Judge Squires's comments, Zuma was fired by Mbeki from his position of Deputy President.

The media went into an orgy of celebration last seen when South Africa won the Rugby World Cup.

Did anybody stop to think that Zuma had not been convicted of anything?

That Mbeki had never before fired any cabinet member?

That Mbeki has constantly hidden behind the "innocent until proven guilty" plea whenever any crony was under investigation or proved incompetent?

Yet here he was firing a man who had done his job and had not been proven guilty of anything.

So now comes the BIG R! Zuma is accused of rape and the media goes into feeding frenzy.

But to the horror of all Mbeki-ites and white racists, the most transparent and publicly analysed trial in the history of South Africa (old and new) finds Zuma innocent on all counts.

Oh! Woe! What to do now? Keep up the pressure on the impending corruption trial, of course.

However, we now hear that the Directorate of Public Prosecutions is not ready to go to court, some four years or more since the investigation was opened.

How would you react if you were in Zuma's shoes? Would you not cry foul? Would you not demand that charges pending for four years and eventually brought against you over a year ago be dropped due to lack of evidence?

I am not a Zuma man, but in this case fair play dictates that "justice delayed is justice denied".

And if you cannot put up, please shut up.

With acknowledgement to Carl Werth and Cape Argus.