Thomas Partey is making headlines after being charged with multiple alleged sexual offences by the Metropolitan Police. The former Arsenal midfielder, who recently left the club after five years on their books, is due to appear in court next month. He is accused of five counts of rape and one count of sexual assault.

In a statement, the Crown Prosecution Service said the alleged offences took place between 2021 and 2022. Two counts of rape relate to one woman, while the other three counts of rape are linked to a second woman and the single charge of sexual assault is linked to a third woman. A police investigation has been ongoing since 2022.

At the time, Express Sport reported that a Premier League footballer had been arrested on suspicion of rape. His bail was later extended on multiple occasions and he was interviewed under caution towards the end of last year.

Earlier this year, we reported that a full file of evidence had been handed over to the Crown Prosecution Service by the Metropolitan Police, but only now can Partey be named, having been charged.

Recent legal precedent has led to suspects rarely being identified prior to charges. In early 2022, the Supreme Court ruled that a person who is under criminal investigation has a reasonable expectation of privacy before they are charged.

The unanimous judgment was delivered in the case of Bloomberg LP vs ZXC. ZXC was an unnamed business executive, claiming misuse of private information over an article relating to a criminal investigation into him and a company of which he headed a division.

The court ruled that a high public interest in publishing information about alleged corruption was not enough to overrule the expectation of privacy a person has when they have not been charged with an offence.

The judgment stated: "Those who have simply come under suspicion by an organ of the state have, in general, a reasonable and objectively founded expectation of privacy in relation to that fact and an expressed basis for that suspicion.

"The reasonable expectation of privacy is not in general dependent on the type of crime being investigated or the public characteristics of the suspect, for example, engagement in politics or business."

That is why Express Sport and many other media organisations chose not to name Partey before he was charged by the Metropolitan Police on Friday.

It had already been difficult for outlets to name suspects prior to charge because of the likelihood of costly lawsuits. Seven years ago, Sir Cliff Richard won a legal case against the BBC over their coverage of a police raid on his home.

Richard, who was never arrested or charged, claimed the BBC were responsible for a 'serious invasion' of his privacy. The singer was initially awarded £210,000 in damages and later received around £2million towards his legal costs.

In some areas, concerns have been raised about a slippery slope leading to suspects potentially being granted anonymity even as they face trial.

Chris Frost, chairman of the Ethics Council of the National Union of Journalists, previously spoke out against draft guidance which would have allowed police forces in England and Wales to withhold the names of people charged with offences.

"Open justice is vital for a just legal system and the public deserves to know who is charged with what in their name," said Frost in 2023.

"The police have slowly eroded the right of the public to know what is being done in their name, first failing to identify suspects, then failing to name those arrested. It was only a matter of time before they took the first step to stop naming those charged.

"They must pull back from this final removal of the right to know so that those who have anything to add to a criminal charge, either in support of the person charged or in support of the police, can come forward.

"It should not be up to the police or the defence to decide what we get to know."