Constituations of Somalia

Puntland

https://www.refworld.org/pdfid/4bc589e92.pdf 

Somalia Federal constituation

https://www.ilo.org/dyn/travail/docs/2176/Constitution1960.pdf

"FROM CENTRALIZATION TO FEDERATION: UNDERSTANDING THE SHIFT TO FEDERALISM IN SOMALIA"

Somalia has a long history of political unrest and instability, which has caused the country's government to change many times. Therefore, the change from a centralized government to a federal government was among the most important. Several reasons contributed to this change, including:

1. In a centralized government system, one person or group had too much power and could make decisions without being held accountable or being watched. This resulted in rampant corruption and power abuse, which ultimately led to the marginalization of substantial portions of the people.
2. Constitution suspended: The centralized government of Somalia had suspended the country's constitution, which meant that there were no legal protections in place to protect citizens' rights and liberties. This led to a lawless environment where people had few ways to speak out against abuses of power.
3. A lack of accountability and checks and balances distinguished the centralized government system of Somalia. Because there was no way to make sure that government officials were held responsible for what they did, corruption and power abuse were able to grow.
4. Somalia has a long history of experiencing human rights violations at the hands of their government, giving rise to historical grievances. Because of this, people are still angry and don't trust the central government. This makes people want a federal structure that gives regional governments more freedom.
5. Under a centralized government structure, regions outside of the capital city were frequently neglected. This resulted in discontent among the citizens of these places, who thought that the government was ignoring their needs and concerns.
6. Widespread abuses of civic rights characterized Somalia's centralized government structure. This included arbitrary arrests, torture, and extrajudicial executions, which fostered an environment of fear and mistrust among the populace.
7. Somalia's northern region, Somaliland, declared independence in 1991, although it was not recognized as a sovereign state. This made the country fall apart even more and made people want a federal government that would give regions more freedom.
8. In the 1990s, numerous Somali tribes and clans fought for power and resources, resulting in a civil war. This further fragmented the nation and strengthened the desire for a federal government.
9. The fact that the state became a "One City State": The centralized administration in Somalia was heavily focused in Mogadishu, with little representation or influence in the regions. This reinforced the desire for a federal system that would offer greater sovereignty to regions. 
10.  In a centralized government system, most of the power and resources were held by a small group of people. This made many people feel like they were being treated unfairly and unequally, which made them want a federal government with a more fair distribution of power and resources.

Overall, these factors resulted in the federalization of Somalia, as the country's political leaders realized that the centralized government system was unworkable. The federal system was viewed as a means to address these concerns, provide greater protection for individual rights, and ensure that choices affecting the lives of individuals were decided at the local level, where they would have greater direct representation.

THE HYPOCRISY OF SOMALI POLITICIANS

 THE HYPOCRISY OF SOMALI POLITICIANS

It is common for politicians in Somalia to be accused of having double standards.

One common example of double standards among Somali politicians is. For example, current president Hassan Shiekh delivered grand speeches for Friday prayer at Masjid in Villa Somalia.

He severely criticizes corruption in the government while engaging in corrupt behavior himself, including vote buying during the 2022 presidential election, nepotism, and bribery.

Another example of hypocrisy among Somali politicians is the tendency to call for transparency and accountability in government while at the same time resisting efforts to scrutinize their own actions and decisions.

Some politicians may demand transparency from their rivals and opponents while simultaneously hiding their own actions and dealings from the public view.

Double standards such as these erode public trust in politicians and the political system, undermining the government's legitimacy.

It is important for politicians to be held accountable for their actions and to be held to the same standards they expect of others.

HOW FEDERALISM STRENGTHENS SOMALIA'S STATE-BUILDING: POWER TO PEOPLE

 HOW FEDERALISM STRENGTHENS SOMALIA'S STATE-BUILDING: POWER TO PEOPLE

Somalia has struggled with several issues in its attempts to establish a powerful and stable state for many years. Some of these challenges are the decentralization of authority, the creation of solid institutions, security, and infrastructure development requirements. But in recent years, the country has made significant progress in tackling these problems, largely because federalism was adopted as a form of government.

Decentralization of power has been one of federalism's main advantages in Somalia. Power was highly consolidated during the previous administration, which resulted in extensive corruption and a lack of accountability. Federalism has aided in decentralizing power by establishing regional entities with autonomous governments and giving them more influence over policy. As a result, it has improved regional governance.

Federalism has not only helped decentralize power but also strengthened Somalia's institutions. Building institutions like the court, police force and parliament has advanced the country significantly. These institutions are essential for upholding the rule of law and ensuring the federal and regional government is answerable to the people. Moreover, by allowing regional administrations to play a more significant part in their growth and establishing a framework for their functioning, federalism has contributed to strengthening these institutions.

Somalia's security has also increased as a result of federalism. Local security forces have grown due to the decentralization of power, and they are now better equipped to combat terrorism and other forms of violence. For example, in Somalia, the terrorist organization Al-Shabaab has posed a significant threat, and the federal system has contributed to a better coordinated and successful response to this threat.

Tribal conflict has always been a problem, although federalism has helped to alleviate it. Reduced tensions and increased stability have resulted from regional entities' improved and peaceful abilities to resolve local issues and disagreements.

Finally, the construction of Somalia's infrastructure has benefited from federalism. Local economies have been able to grow thanks to the decentralization of power, which has boosted regional infrastructure projects like building roads, and ports by attracting interest in federalism.

In conclusion, federalism has played a significant role in Somalia's development toward establishing a robust and stable state. The establishment of this form of governance has contributed to the decentralization of authority, strong institutions, increased security, and infrastructural development. Federalism will likely play a significant role in Somalia's development as it works to rebuild and recover from its turbulent history.

Said Noor

Saidnoor571@gmail.com

Like

Comment

Share

Will Muse Bixi be able to keep Lascaano occupied?

 Will Muse Bixi be able to keep Lascaano occupied?

Lascaanood is a town in the Sool region of Somalia, located in a strategic location. For many years, it has been the scene of continual fighting as several Somali factions struggled to control the area. Clan rivalry, territorial issues, and competition for resources like pasture and water have all contributed to the strife in Lascaanood.

The long-running clan rivalries and territorial disputes between Puntland and Somaliland over Lascaanood and other territories in the Sool region are the main causes of the conflicts.

The history of the Sool region is complicated, with numerous clans and subclans competing for dominance. The area has also been impacted by outside factors.

Civil unrest has been caused by the Somaliland militia's presence in the town and the harm they committed to the populace.

There have been about a hundred murders in Lascano during the past few years, including those of intellectuals, businessmen, women, and children. Unfortunately, Muse Biixi's government has not managed to apprehend the criminals. Additionally, stop recurrent assassinations.

Many feel that Muse Biix is operating covertly and employing public conflict and the divide-and-rule method.

The unarmed young man's death by an unidentified last week worsened the situation. That act sparked numerous protests, but Muse Biixi's militia responded by using live ammunition on the protestors. It is believed that scores of rallies were killed over the course of several episodes.

Elders from the community declared that Lascano would not tolerate random killing. War had been declared against Muse Biixi and his militia. These events made the situation worse.

According to most people, that war will liberate the Lascano and force Muse to disband his militia from the region.

Other elements, like his internal tribe strife and Muse Bixi's militia's illegitimate power extension, hinder his desire to hold Lascano. The extension has been rejected and vehemently opposed by Somaliland's political groups; as a result, some politicians from Besha Isaaq believe a power struggle conflict among tribes is imminent.

These political barriers will make it difficult for muse Biixi to keep Lascaano occupied.

Though the conflict is centered on Lascano, Muse Bixi is powerless to keep Lascaano occupied. The idea of a two-member federal state has been considered the most practicable way to end the conflict between Somaliland and Khatumo.

Challenge of State formation in Somalia.

 Challenge of State formation in Somalia.

State-building in Somalia has been a complicated and ongoing process for more than three decades. As a result, the nation has suffered from state failure, violence, and the existence of numerous armed non-state entities ever since the Central Government fell apart in 1991. 

Due to these issues, the international community and the Somali government have found it difficult to reestablish the state, security, and governance.

A fundamental challenge to constructing a functional state is stronger political will. According to a survey from the Fund for Peace, Somalia is currently the ninth most unstable country in the world. The government has struggled to maintain control over the entire country, making it impossible to establish core institutions and services. In addition, the ongoing conflict with armed non-state groups, including as al-Shabaab, has made it more difficult for the government to rule and ensure the protection of the public.

One more is corruption, a significant problem for Somalia's state-building. The country has many types of corruption, including bribery, vote-buying, embezzling public monies, and nepotism.

Analysts, investigators, investigators, and even Western ambassadors noticed the 2022 presidential election that seated Hassan Shiekh in office as one of the most fraudulent in Somalia.

According to the New York Times, at least $20 million was spent to sway the results of the parliamentary elections that determined who would become president.

Many believe that powerful foreign nations like Turkey, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, and Qatar bought off presidential candidates to advance their interests. However, corruption has hampered Somalia's efforts to develop state-building.

Besides, it has proven challenging to coordinate and negotiate with numerous clans within the nation. With a complex structure of clans and sub-clans, Somalia is a deeply divided nation, and these differences frequently fuel conflict and thwart attempts to reestablish the state. In addition, armed non-state actors have often considered barriers to state construction, but they can also be included in state-building operations, according to a paper by the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.

The subject of autonomy or secession for Somaliland and Puntland has further complicated the state-building possibilities in Somalia. Both regions have declared autonomy and created their own institutions and governments. These regions have received support from the international community.

Some worries getting too involved in this struggle would encourage Somalia's split, which would be disastrous in the eyes of many Somali citizens.

Lastly, the process of creating a state in Somalia has been challenging and complex, and there are many obstacles. Even though there has been some improvement, the situation is still precarious, and it will take time and persistent work to reconstruct the state, provide security, and establish a robust institution. Therefore, finding tactics that will successfully address the underlying issues and establish long-lasting peace in the country will be essential for state formation.

 President Deni declined the offer

Two of the five points agreed upon by the federal government, regional governments, and the Banadir area and included in the press release of the National Consultative Council meeting were rejected by the Puntland regional government. These two issues were the distribution of federal power to the states and the centralization of the judicial system.

Although Puntland has a stable government, complete control of its territory, and a growing economy, many do not consider it to be on par with the states that rely on Muqdisho port, and half of its land is under Alshabab's rule.

Common misconceptions about federalism include the idea that all states, regardless of strength, have equal access to privileges like power sharing.

What we have here is a federalist system in which the states are ranked according to their relative power and influence. Factors like population, good governance, economy, and geography all play a role in a region's relative clout and ability to exert influence.

That's why it's impossible to draw any conclusions about how the Federal's various members share equal power and resources distribution.

Overall, Puntland has the right to reject any agreement that weakens its position. In terms of their power and influence inside the federal system of government, the federal members are unequal despite their equal legal standing under the Constitution.