Why the Delay?

It's hard to fathom what is going on with plans to judge those deemed responsible for Kenya's post-election violence in 2007/08.
Just a month ago, former U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan, a peace broker in the post-poll chaos, said the coalition government had to take concrete steps towards setting up a local tribunal by the end of August or he would hand an envelope with the names of the top suspects to the International Criminal Court (ICC) in the Hague. Now, it seems Kenyan parliamentarians have agreed with the ICC to set up a local tribunal by July 2010, or then hand the case over to the ICC.
On Friday, the ICC prosecutor gave Kenya 12 months to set up a special tribunal, saying his was a court of last resort.
A statement released after a meeting of Kenyan ministers and Luis Moreno-Ocampo said: “If there is no parliamentary agreement, and in accordance with the Kenya Government’s commitment to end impunity of those responsible for the most serious crimes, the Government of Kenya will refer the situation to the prosecutor in accordance with Article 14 of the Rome Statute
Why the delay? It's a bit of a thumbsucker given that until recently speed seemed to be the order of the day. In June, Annan said: "If it (a local tribunal) is not established within a reasonable period in this case towards the end of August, I will have no option but to hand over the envelope to the ICC to take over from there."
So is the ICC getting cold feet? Is this the effect of increasingly vocal opposition on the continent to a court that is perceived by many to focus most of its attention on Africa, while ignoring human rights abuses by leaders/governments in other regions?
On Saturday, AU ministers passed a resolution to deny the ICC cooperation regarding Sudan's indicted President Omar al Bashir. They argued that the chaos in Darfur, which his indictment was meant to address, might escalate if an arrest warrant for him is executed
Or is this because the war in Kenya's neighbour Somalia -- where foreign fighters are said to be joining the militant al Shabaab group against the Western-backed transitional government -- means that anything that might cause instability in Kenya is now too high-risk a strategy. This post certainly thinks so.
In other words, a strong Kenya -- or at least a Kenya that is not openly at war with itself as a court tries to pin blame on those most responsible for the post-election violence -- is needed to help thwart al Shabaab and its allies, and hold this most recent, and increasingly violent, front in the "war on terror".
Kenya is vulnerable. Last week, the US-based Fund for Peace and Foreign Policy Institute ranked it 14th in its list of failed states -- that's below North Korea, Yemen and Ethiopia. Last year, it was in 26th place. And perhaps the international community thinks that a vulnerable albeit imperfect state next-door to a state that harbours al Qaeda allies needs support, more than justice.

I would be interested to know what Annan has to say about this deadline change, which certainly takes the pressure off the Kenyan government. With a 12-month deadline, you can't help but think that the issue is being swept under the carpet. A lot can happen in a year in politics.