By Goth Mohamed Goth

MOGADISHU — The President of the Federal Government of Somalia, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, has signed into law the country’s newly revised constitution, following its approval by both houses of the Federal Parliament on March 4th.

At a ceremony held at the presidential palace in Mogadishu, attended by the speakers of both parliamentary chambers, President Mohamud hailed the move as the culmination of a vital legislative process. “The Federal Parliament of Somalia has finalized the constitutional review,” he stated. “From this day forward, we are committed to its implementation and to ensuring the Somali people attain the rights and duties enshrined within it.”

President Mohamud framed the new charter as a unifying “social contract” for the nation. “This document is a social contract, and I hope it will lead Somalia towards peace, stability, and upright, transparent governance,” he added.

While the president’s signature represents the final step in enacting the constitution, the process has been anything but unifying. Instead of cementing national consensus, the hurried ratification has significantly escalated political tensions, exposing deep fractures in the country’s federal system.

Widespread Opposition and Accusations of a Power Grab

The constitutional changes have been met with fierce resistance from key federal member states, opposition parties, and civil society groups, who view the process as fundamentally illegitimate.

· Rejection by Federal Member States: Puntland, one of Somalia’s most established federal states, has outright rejected the new constitution. The Puntland government has declared it will not recognize any amendments made without its participation and has suspended ties with the federal government, essentially functioning independently. Jubaland and South West states have also expressed serious reservations, arguing that the review process violated the federal principles outlined in the Provisional Constitution. Their core grievance is that such a fundamental national pact cannot be unilaterally imposed by Mogadishu.
· An “Illegitimate and Exclusive” Process: Critics, including prominent opposition leaders and lawmakers, contend that the process was rushed through parliament without the necessary consensus. They argue that the required consultations with federal member states, clan elders, and civil society were either superficial or completely ignored. This lack of inclusivity, they say, has produced a document that reflects the interests of the central government in Mogadishu, not the will of the Somali people.
· Allegations of Term Extension: The most incendiary accusation is that the revisions are a political maneuver by President Mohamud to consolidate power and potentially extend his time in office. By embedding controversial changes in the constitution, opponents believe the president is seeking to weaken federalism and centralize authority, undermining the power-sharing agreements that have been the basis for Somalia’s fragile stability. They view the new constitution not as a step towards democracy, but as a tool for authoritarian rule.

A Deepening Political Crisis

Far from resolving Somalia’s political uncertainty, the signing of the constitution risks plunging the country into an even deeper crisis.

· Deepening the Federal Rift: The move has widened the chasm between the federal government in Mogadishu and the semi-autonomous regional states. By pressing ahead without their consent, Mogadishu has effectively dared these states to secede from the national framework, threatening to unravel the very fabric of the federal system. This could lead to a collapse of security and economic cooperation, creating parallel and competing authorities.
· A Constitution Without Consensus, A Recipe for Instability: A constitution that is rejected by powerful regional actors and a significant portion of the political class is a recipe for perpetual conflict. Instead of a binding “social contract,” it becomes a source of dispute, a weapon to be used in political battles. This contested legitimacy undermines the rule of law, as different factions will adhere to different versions of what is legal.
· Paralysis and Potential for Conflict: The resulting standoff risks paralyzing national institutions. With key federal states refusing to recognize the central government’s authority on constitutional matters, implementing any of the new charter’s provisions will be nearly impossible. The heightened political temperature and mutual accusations of illegitimacy create a volatile environment that could easily escalate into open conflict, undoing years of hard-won progress and diverting focus from critical priorities like the fight against Al-Shabaab

By Goth Mohamed Goth

Mogadishu — The authorities in Puntland have issued a formal condemnation against the Somali Federal Government, alleging that security forces launched a pre-dawn raid on lawmakers who represent the regional state in the Federal Parliament.

According to a statement released by the Puntland presidency on Tuesday, the operation targeted legislators who have publicly opposed the ongoing constitutional amendments. The statement specifically claims that members of both the House of the People (Lower House) and the Upper House (Senators) were attacked at the Airport Hotel, located in the Xalane district of Mogadishu.

The Puntland administration described the incident as an act of “torture and abduction” carried out without due process.

“We strongly condemn the attack this morning [3:00 AM] by the Federal Government on the Puntland parliamentarians at the Airport Hotel,” the statement read. The authorities further denounced the alleged detention of Ahmed Abdi Hurre, the Advisor to the Puntland President for Social Affairs.

Puntland emphasized that the lawmakers had committed no crime and were subjected to what it termed an “unprecedented act in governance.” The statement concluded by holding the Federal Government of Somalia “fully responsible for whatever results from this heinous act.”

The incident highlights the escalating political tensions between the Federal Government in Mogadishu and the regional state of Puntland, which has been a vocal critic of recent federal policies and constitutional revisions. As of now, the Somali Federal Government has not issued an official response to the allegations.

By Goth Mohamed Goth

Mogadishu – The Deputy Minister of Labour and Social Affairs, MP Caynaanshe Yusuf Hussein, and the Deputy Minister of Petroleum and Mineral Resources, MP Ismacil Shire Buraale, resigned last night.

These two officials, who hailing from Puntland, stated that they oppose the constitutional amendments, pointing out that the process lacked consensus and did not follow proper legal procedures.

The constitutional amendments have sparked significant disagreement, deeply dividing the members of both houses of the Somali parliament.

This event marks a significant political development in Somalia, highlighting the deep-seated tensions surrounding the ongoing constitutional review process. Here is a more detailed breakdown of the context and implications:

· The Core Issue: Constitutional Amendments: The government, led by President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, is pushing forward with a series of amendments to the country’s provisional constitution. These changes are highly contentious. Key points of debate often include the nature of the political system (e.g., moving towards direct elections), the distribution of powers between the federal government and federal member states (like Puntland), and the overall structure of governance.
· Puntland’s Stance: The fact that both resigned ministers are from Puntland is crucial. Puntland is one of Somalia’s most established federal member states and has often been at odds with the central government over issues of power-sharing, resource control, and constitutional legitimacy. Puntland authorities have previously stated they do not recognize the federal government’s unilateral push for constitutional changes, insisting that such fundamental matters require broad consensus among all federal states. These resignations are likely a reflection of that official Puntland position and put pressure on other politicians from the region who remain in government.
· Accusations of Illegitimate Process: The ministers’ statement that the process “lacked consensus and proper legal procedures” is a serious and common criticism from the opposition. They argue that the amendments are being rushed through parliament without sufficient consultation with federal member states, civil society, and other key stakeholders. This, they contend, violates the spirit of federalism and could further destabilize the country by deepening the divide between Mogadishu and the regional states.
· Parliamentary Divide: The report mentions that the issue has “deeply divided” the members of both houses of parliament (the House of the People and the Upper House). This means the government cannot rely on a unified front to pass its agenda. The Upper House (Senate), which represents the federal member states, is particularly sensitive to changes that affect state powers. The divisions could lead to legislative gridlock, heightened political tensions, and even physical confrontations within the parliament, as has happened in the past.
· Political Fallout: The resignation of two sitting MPs who were also deputy ministers is a symbolic and practical blow to the government. It signals a loss of support from a specific and important regional constituency. It could embolden other dissenting MPs to speak out or resign, weakening the government’s majority and its ability to pass the amendments. It also reinforces the narrative that the current constitutional review process is not inclusive and is facing serious resistance.

In essence, these resignations are not just isolated events but a symptom of a much larger political crisis in Somalia regarding the fundamental rules of how the country should be governed. They underscore the fragile relationship between the federal government in Mogadishu and the federal member states, particularly Puntland.