In the meantime, Vice President Kalonzo Musyoka has continued to defend Kenya’s deferral bid as necessary to support the fledgling reforms under the 2010 Constitution and to protect Kenya’s sovereignty. See story here and here.
He denied that the deferral bid did not take into account the interests of post election violence and instead argued that the move was intended to promote reconciliation. See Musyoka’s statement to Parliament on his shuttle diplomacy in Africa seeking support for the deferral.
In an opinion piece in Sunday papers in Nairobi on February, 13, 2011, Kalonzo argued that “A deferral is simply an affirmation of Kenya’s new start and a chance to give our new institutions room to flourish. Deferral is not a permanent cessation of ICC action. It is only suspension for one year within which time, if no local mechanism has been set up, then the ICC process can continue.” Kalonzo further argued that the deferral bid was necessary because “All Kenya wants from the ICC is respect for the strides we have made since 2007/2008.”