Annan has called the bluff on suspects against local trials

Internet chatter and reactions on the street suggests widespread excitement, or fear, that very soon key political leaders in Kenya, including very senior members of the cabinet, will face the indignity of being clamped in leg irons and handcuffs to be flown to The Hague to stand trial before the International Criminal Court.

The reality, however, is that it could be a few months before ICC chief prosecutor Luis Moreno Ocampo acts on the list of names in the sealed envelope handed over to him on Thursday by former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

Mr Annan, who chaired the Panel of Eminent Africans that mediated a settlement to Kenya’s post-election crisis, explained that he had handed over the envelope following the agreement reached between Mr Ocampo and a Kenya government delegation on July 3.

Mr Ocampo gave Kenya until the end of September to indicate clear direction on local mechanism for trying post-election violence suspects.

The delegation — Justice minister Mutula Kilonzo, Lands minister James Orengo (as representatives of the PNU and ODM faction, respectively) in the coalition government, and Attorney-General Amos Wako — had travelled to Geneva to meet with Mr Annan on July 2 and to meet Mr Ocampo at the Hague the following day.

The original attempt for a Special Tribunal had been thrown out by parliament in February, and since then it had become increasingly clear that powerful leaders from both sides of the political divide had ganged up to frustrate such a mechanism.

While President Kibaki and Prime Minister Raila Odinga were keen to have a Special Tribunal established locally, key leaders, with agriculture minister William Ruto at the forefront, were openly agitating against such an eventuality.

The issue of trial for post-election violence suspects was one of the key ingredients to the bad blood in ODM between Mr Odinga and Mr Ruto, with the latter’s supporters openly accusing the Prime Minister of betraying the Kalenjin political bloc that supported him so strongly at the 2007 elections and therefore helped his ascendancy to his present high office.

The irony is that from the other side of the national divide, a central Kenya bloc seen to be led by Deputy Prime Minister Uhuru Kenyatta was also against the Special Tribunal and preferred the Hague option.

While Mr Ruto was undisputed leader of the Kalenjin grouping at the elections, Mr Kenyatta had merely assumed more prominence than other Central Province leaders as President Kibaki retreated to State House at the height of the post-election violence and the Kikuyu looked for a champion to rally the troops in the face of widespread evictions in the Rift Valley.

Mr Ruto and Mr Kenyatta therefore came to be seen as the leaders of the key antagonists in the Rift Valley theatre.

While Mr Kenyatta has not been as open and vocal as Mr Ruto in dismissing the Special Tribunal, some of his statements, and unequivocal pronouncements by key allies and aides, left no doubt what he preferred.

It was ironical that the two presumed antagonists were united in support for the Hague option; and doubly ironical that they were widely reported to be re-crafting their old political alliance.

The KK, or Kikuyu-Kalenjin alliance, that their respective supporters talked about would have the ultimate aim of derailing Mr Odinga’s prospects come 2012.

Although Mr Ruto and Mr Kenyatta remained extremely coy about their intentions, MPs who acted as their unofficial spokesmen made it clear at every opportunity that an alliance was in the works.

Mr Ruto, who is also a deputy party leader in ODM, remains the key figure in Kalenjin politics and has been mulling over his own presidential bid.

Mr Kenyatta, who is also Finance minister and Kanu chairman, stands at the head of the line-up of leaders from central Kenya seeking to inherit President Kibaki’s mantle.

For the moment, however, a lot of plans might have to be put on hold as the ramifications of The Hague option are considered.

For one, Mr Annan and Mr Ocampo might be moving to call the bluff on those who have been expressing preference for the ICC on the basis that it is slow and ponderous.

For the moment they have put the pressure on President Kibaki and Mr Odinga to move speedily and meet the deadline.

The list remains secret and there is only educated guesswork on who might be set for indictment.

Close reading of the Waki report, however, suggests that the list is topped by leaders from the Rift Valley who financed and organised initial violence; and leaders from central Kenya who in turn organised retaliatory attacks that targeted civilians.

Even if Mr Ocampo might not move immediately, the latest development is pretty dramatic.

Kenya is still far from resolving the root causes of the violence as envisaged under Agenda 4.

The Rift Valley remains a powder keg in terms of Kikuyu-Kalenjin relations despite contacts between leaders from both sides.

Indictments or arrests could well provoke fresh rounds of violence that neither the leaders from both sides, nor President Kibaki or Prime Minister Odinga, could diffuse.