The avalanche of legal papers filed recently in the Pietermaritzburg High Court in a preliminary skirmish between Jacob Zuma and the state might not shed much new light on the merits of the case.

It nevertheless makes fascinating reading - who needs The Da Vinci Code when one is presented with more than 700 pages of affidavits filed as part of Zuma's application for a permanent stay of prosecution in his fraud and corruption trial?

It would, of course, be inappropriate to comment in any way on the merits of the case. However, to my mind the documents reveal much about the broader political controversy surrounding the trial, and serve as a startling reminder of the skill with which the Zuma camp has managed to move the focus away from the actual charges of corruption and fraud, to the more vague allegations of a dark conspiracy against him.

It also shines a harsh spotlight on the behaviour of the previous head of the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA), Bulelani Ngcuka, and poses questions about his independence and impartiality as National Director of Public Prosecutions.

Zuma's affidavit reads less like a serious legal document dealing in proven fact and more like the outraged and hurt ruminations of a scorned maiden. In a tone bristling with indignation and anger, he claims the decision to investigate and then, eventually, prosecute him was "from the outset designed solely or mainly to destroy my reputation and political role-playing ability".

Furthermore, he argues that the delays in bringing his case to court, delays originally caused, first, by the decision of Ngcuka not to charge him and, second, by the various legal challenges to the raids on his premises and those of his lawyers, make a fair trial impossible and endanger his chances of becoming the president of the ANC.

Others have pointed out that in legal terms there is almost no chance that Zuma's application will succeed. If the court agrees to permanently stay his prosecution, it would throw the whole criminal justice system into crisis, because literally hundreds of thousands of cases with similar delays where the accused was similarly treated would have to be stayed.

This suggests the application is intended to achieve broader political objectives. Given Zuma's strategy so far, one may hazard a guess that it is intended to keep alive the notion that there is a conspiracy against him and that he is being unfairly and outrageously persecuted by the state.

It is true that the case has dragged on for an inordinately long time - now almost six years. It is also true that Ngcuka is the main culprit in causing this delay. However, what becomes clear from the affidavits filed by the state - especially from the version provided by advocate Leonard McCarthy - is that these delays were in most part caused by the fact that until the conviction of Schabir Shaik, the state went out of its way to protect Zuma and his much-vaunted political reputation.

As Ngcuka himself admits in his affidavit, "if any criticism is to be levelled at the manner in which the investigation was handled, in retrospect, it is that I (Ngcuka) may have tried too hard to protect Accused No1's reputation and not the contrary".

Although Zuma was a target of the investigation from an early stage, the state went out of its way to protect his identity, even referring to him in court papers as Mr X - something that would never happen where an ordinary citizen is criminally investigated.

With acknowledgements to Pierre de Vos and the Cape Times.