When Jacob Zuma appears in the Pietermaritzburg High Court next week, not only will he be accompanied by a contingent of ANC leaders, but he will have the support of hundreds of thousands of ANC members.

A number of people have publicly expressed disquiet at this. Others have been harsher, condemning the ANC for supporting its president during this time. Still others have resorted to all manner of hyperbole, predicting the demise of the judiciary and the death of democracy.

Such predictions may find themselves on the lunatic fringe of public debate, but they indicate a fundamental fault line in people's understanding of this case, and why the ANC has taken the position that it has.

Those familiar with the ANC would know that it does not act on a whim. The decisions it takes are informed by the values and principles that have underpinned the struggle for democracy and human rights. Everything it does is guided by these principles, including such fundamental notions that no government can claim authority unless it is based on the will of the people, that all shall be equal before the law, and that South Africa belongs to all who live in it. And when it takes positions, it does so after thorough discussion and consultation.

The ANC's position on the case brought against Jacob Zuma is by no means one taken in haste or without proper reflection. It is informed by the very same principles that underpin our democracy, and by the need to build a society in which human rights are respected and no person is subject to the arbitrary exercise of power.

To that end, the ANC has been at the forefront of a decades-long struggle to establish a society founded on a democratic constitution, in which there is an independent, impartial and fair judiciary that safeguards the rights and interests of all people.

This remains an ongoing challenge. While we have put in place the fundamental laws and the necessary constitutional provisions for the existence of such a judicial system, there is much that still needs transformation. Matters of composition, representivity, cultural bias, and language remain concerns. As does the crucial question of improving access to the law for the poor and vulnerable.

It is for these reasons that the ANC will consistently strive to uphold and defend the integrity and credibility of the judiciary and other institutions of state. Even if this means publicly raising concerns about members of such institutions who through their own actions undermine the integrity of the bodies in which they serve.

It is important to remember that these institutions do not belong to the individuals who serve in them. They belong to the people, and those who currently occupy important positions in such institutions cannot take lightly the responsibility that the people have placed on their shoulders.

There is, for example, no contradiction between the need to safeguard the integrity of the Constitutional Court and the right of any individual or organisation to criticise the manner in which the judges of the court conduct themselves.

It is important that while there is vibrant public debate on such matters, we should allow the appropriate processes to run their course without any undue external influence. The ANC maintains, for example, that the complaint laid by the Constitutional Court against Cape Judge President John Hlope should be left to the Judicial Services Commission to deal with.

Concerns about fairness

It is precisely because of its commitment to upholding the Constitution that the ANC feels compelled to raise its concern about matters relating to the charges against Jacob Zuma.

It has consistently, in this and other cases, asserted the constitutional prescription that an accused person must be presumed innocent until found otherwise in a court of law.

Yet those who criticise the ANC for its stance, and those who have waged a bitter campaign of attrition against Zuma, tend to ignore this. The general approach they take is that Jacob Zuma is guilty, and it is up to him to prove his innocence.

Some take the view that though he may not have been found guilty, he is at least tainted by the charges that have been leveled against. After all, where there is smoke there is usually fire.

But if, as a society, we are serious about what we have enshrined in our Bill of Rights, we are bound to accept that the presumption of innocence is not partial or discretionary.

Until such time as a court tells us otherwise, Jacob Zuma is an innocent person. That is why the ANC has supported him until now and will continue to support him.

This is a position of principle. So too is the ANC's assertion of the constitutional provision that: "Everyone is equal before the law and has the right to equal protection and benefit of the law."

Sadly, that has not been the case in the 8-year-long pursuit of Jacob Zuma. He has not enjoyed the right of fair and equal treatment.

Throughout the investigation and prosecution of this case the ANC President has had his rights repeatedly violated by institutions of state, specifically the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA). This was confirmed by an investigation conducted by the Public Protector, and findings that point to selective prosecution.

The NPA has consistently undermined due legal process, showing itself prone to leaks that seem specifically aimed to impugn the character of the ANC President. The off-the-record briefing to selected editors by the former National Director of Public Prosecutions set the tone for a prosecution conducted in the court of public opinion.

He has been subjected to a vicious and unrelenting trial by media, having been found guilty long before his case has even come to court.

In general terms, but with very few exceptions, the media has abandoned any pretence at impartiality or fairness. The much-vaunted code of journalistic ethics has crumbled in the wake of a headlong rush to shame Zuma into submission.

The inordinate amount of time that this matter has taken to come to court is similarly cause for concern. The Constitution says that an accused has a right to have their trial begin and conclude without unreasonable delay. This issue has taken the better part of a decade to come to this point, where Zuma is to appear in court to face the latest round of charges. It is little wonder that many people are asserting the basic maxim that justice delayed is justice denied.

The fact that the scope of the charges brought against Zuma has been broadened since the previous indictment, to include charges on tax matters for example, gives weight to the view that the ANC President is being persecuted rather than merely prosecuted.

The manner in which this case has been handled by the authorities over the last few years - and the role played by the media - has reinforced the perception that this is a political trial and has fuelled doubts about his chances of receiving a fair hearing.

The ANC has been quite clear that in court proceedings between the democratic state and an individual, it cannot and should not take sides. That is why the ANC has said that the law should be allowed to take its course.

The ANC has similarly not pronounced itself on the merits or demerits of the charges themselves. The ANC does not have the capacity nor the mandate to investigate, consider and pronounce on such matters.

But the ANC does reserve its right to comment on matters that violate the rights of the individual, and which undermine the proper application of justice.

This matter is not simply about Jacob Zuma. It is about the principles and practices upon which we intend to build a new society, one that is democratic, just and equitable.

It is also about the assertion of the right of any group of people to freely choose whom they wish to lead them. The members of the ANC have unequivocally said that they want Jacob Zuma to be their president. They have further said that they will be putting him forward as the ANC's candidate for President of South Africa in the 2009 elections.

The ANC will therefore vigorously resist any attempts to undermine the collective will of its membership or the freely expressed will of the South African people.

As the ANC has repeatedly said, we seek no special treatment for our President. We simply ask that he be treated fairly and justly.

Kgalema Motlanthe is Deputy President of the ANC. This article first appeared in ANC Today Volume 8, No. 30 August 1 2008