Issue No. 554

NCC proposals: Contradictory and Controversial
 

On 27 May, seemingly out of nowhere, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud (HSM), Prime Minister Hamza Abdi Barre and the regional Presidents of South West, Jubaland, Galmudug and Hirshabelle, along with Banaadir’s Governor, shocked Somalia by proposing wide-ranging changes to the country’s system of governance. In a barely fleshed-out statement, the National Consultative Council (NCC), Somalia’s ad hoc decision-making body, laid out the most radical constitutional proposals in over a decade. Abolishing the post of prime minister, instituting nationwide one-person one-vote elections by the close of 2024, granting term extensions for parliament, regional and federal bodies, limiting politics to two parties, and shifting to a multi-party presidential system were all included. Dust is still swirling around the proposed overhaul, but several of its elements have received particular scrutiny and criticism from opposition figures in Somalia.
 
One particularly important element of the NCC proposals is a transition to a multi-party presidential system akin to that of the US. But Somalia’s multi-party system would only recognise two official parties, quite a leap from the 110 registered in Somalia today. Having just two parties in a “closed proportional representation list” is contradictory, and worse, it, would rob Somalis of genuine choice.
 
Limiting politicians to just two parties was justified in the NCC statement in the name of national ‘unity.’ But arbitrarily limiting the number of political competitors is fundamentally incompatible with democracy. Political movements and parties must be allowed to emerge as and when a country and its people need them. And a two-party system does not preclude polarisation or disunity, as seen in the United States in recent years. An issue-based political environment cannot be artificially installed simply by limiting the number of political parties.
 
Much like the proposed term extensions for the Federal Member State (FMS) presidents, this proposal may be perceived as laced with self-interest. HSM is almost certain to run for another term in the next presidential election as one of the potential leaders of one of the two proposed parties. With such a vested interest in its outcome, it is hard to imagine how he could effectively oversee such a wide-reaching and delicate transition in advance. Establishing a fully independent electoral commission not tied to any given politician will be critical to any chance of success.
 
A mandated two-party system further runs the risk of deepening clan divisions, with the two parties almost certain to be dominated by the Hawiye and the Darood. While criticism has certainly been levelled at the current ‘hybrid’ 4.5 clan-based political system, it does ensure clan representation. Potentially alienating and excluding smaller clans through the newly proposed system could be profoundly divisive in a country where clan relations are complex, dynamic and frequently conflicting.
 
The proposed presidential system would also abolish the position of prime minister, currently held by Hamza Abdi Barre, in favour of the post of Vice President. Calls for reform to Somalia’s current executive, which splits power between the president and the prime minister, are not new. One critique of the current model highlights the near-ubiquitous falling out of presidents with their prime ministers in Somalia. This has proved deeply destabilising at times. In December 2021, President Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed ‘Farmaajo’ suspended Prime Minister Mohamed Hussein Roble over unsubstantiated corruption claims amidst division over Farmaajo’s attempt to delay elections. Some believe that centralising the executive would prevent such future divisions. Yet the checks and balances of the current hybrid system prevented violence on that occasion. Indeed, Roble acted as an effective check against Farmaajo’s attempts to extend his stay in office.
 
HSM rode to power partially on the back of anger over the blatant attempt to extend Farmaajo’s time in office. Yet the newly proposed term extensions for FMS presidents are straight out of Farmaajo’s transactional playbook. The destabilising trend of regional extensions began in South West in April 2020 when its parliament voted to hand Abdiasis Laftagareen two additional years in office. Extensions for Jubaland President Ahmed Madoobe and Galmudug President Ahmed Abdi Karie ‘Qoorqoor’ followed. By promising to enshrine these controversial extensions, HSM could shore up support for other sweeping changes. But term extensions set a bad precedent, undermining public confidence in leadership, and proving deeply divisive in Federal Member States. In Jubaland, Gedo politicians have criticised the Federal Government of Somalia over perceived interference in regional politics. Bubbling tensions now threaten to spill over into armed conflict between Gedo opposition and Madoobe’s administration.
 
Hailing the NCC proposals as the realisation of democracy in Somalia is misleading.  Establishing a presidential system will not fix Somalia's weak institutions and poor governance. And a new system of governance cannot be imposed on a divided country without profound consequences, as the failures of state-building in Afghanistan and Iraq have revealed.
 
At the same time, several elements of the NCC proposals should be lauded, particularly aspirations towards one-person one-vote elections in Somalia, even if the 2024 timeline is highly unrealistic. Greater clarity and consensus-building are needed, immediately, to provide some semblance of stability in Somalia’s inflamed political arena. HSM and PM Barre have both rightly insisted they do not intend to force the new proposals through parliament. To do so would have damaging consequences for Somalia’s parliamentary integrity and for wider acceptance of the proposals themselves. In the meantime, one area on which the NCC could provide greater clarity pertains to the criteria for determining the two official parties for presumably presidential elections. Finally, the NCC should reopen and widen room for debate. If its members are confident of their proposals, they should welcome greater input to move forward in a more cohesive manner.