Finally, it’s over.

Jian Ghomeshi, former star host of CBC radio’s flagship Q program on culture and the arts, no longer faces a June trial for the alleged sexual assault of Kathryn Borel, a former co-worker.

The criminal charge -- the last one Ghomeshi faced after being acquitted on five others involving three other complainants -- has been withdrawn in return for Ghomeshi reading a written apology in court for his behaviour with Borel, as well as agreeing to comply with a peace bond.

Thus, the Ghomeshi saga has come to a grinding halt and will eventually recede from memory. But Borel’s compelling statement after the settlement was finalized about what she described as how Ghomeshi’s sexually inappropriate behaviour affected her, will, let’s hope, not be forgotten.

And the wider issues here -- how women are treated in the work place and how our courts deal with allegations of sexual assault -- remain major concerns.

Ghomeshi, who admitted to no criminal wrongdoing, read out an apology to Borel agreeing he had behaved in a “sexually inappropriate” manner and took advantage of her through the “power imbalance” in their relationship.

He signed a peace bond requiring his “good behavior” for a year, in return for the dropping of the sexual assault charge. If he violates it, he risks a fine or imprisonment.

I find it puzzling the Crown agreed to settle the case in this way, as there was reportedly an eye witness to the alleged assault.

Now that the last criminal charge against Ghomeshi has been withdrawn, we are also seeing a repeat of the tiresome “blame the victim” narrative that occurs in so many sexual assault cases.

This is due to the fact Borel, who accused Ghomeshi of repeatedly ramming his pelvis into her backside, agreed in a 2013 interview with Jesse Brown in his Canadaland podcast that she had at times been, “incredibly inappropriate, foul-mouthed and sexual” at the CBC.

So what? None of that is relevant to how Ghomeshi treated Borel because, as he acknowledged in his statement, he was the one with the power in their relationship.

Indeed, as Ghomeshi said, Borel “was younger than me and in a junior position to mine... I now recognize that I crossed boundaries inappropriately. I did not appreciate the damage that I caused.”

It’s troubling Ghomeshi’s apology and promise of “good behavior” in a peace bond for a year is the only legal consequence of his actions.

Historically, peace bonds have featured prominently in domestic violence cases, where evidence is more difficult to obtain in what is typically a pure case of “he said/she said”, with no independent witnesses.

Women’s rights groups are correct to argue we need special laws to deal with sexual assault cases.

In this case, Ghomeshi gains immensely from the peace bond.

No matter how it was arrived at, he has escaped prosecution with an apology for “thoughtless and insensitive behavior” when, if convicted of sexual assault, he could have faced a prison sentence.

In my view, the fact he escaped trial on this charge is a step backward for women’s rights, even if he would have been acquitted.

That said, at least it’s now on the record Ghomeshi has admitted to sexually inappropriate behaviour and that he took unfair advantage of a woman in their workplace relationship, in which he was the one with the power.