Since 2014, Somalia’s amnesty program for Al-Shabaab defectors has aimed to encourage fighters to surrender in exchange for rehabilitation and reintegration. Backed by international partners, the initiative established centers in Mogadishu, Kismayo, and Baidoa, offering deradicalization, vocational training, and community reintegration. While some high-profile defectors such as Hassan Dahir Aweys, Mohamed Said Atom, Zakria Ismail, and Mukhtar Roobow accepted the offer, the program has been undermined by political manipulation, lack of transparency, and inconsistent outcomes. Certain defectors have been rewarded with government or intelligence positions, raising fears of infiltration, while others have been jailed, sent into exile, or quietly abandoned. Many low-profile defectors face intimidation, abduction, or assassination by former comrades, leading some to rejoin Al-Shabaab. Others struggle to reintegrate due to broken government promises of safety and employment. Critics argue the program fails to fully leverage defectors as credible voices against extremism, missing valuable intelligence opportunities. Instead of consistent debriefing and support, defectors are often sidelined, leaving the initiative unpredictable and ineffective. Without clear standards, transparency, and genuine follow through, Somalia’s amnesty program risks deterring future defections and losing a critical tool in the fight against violent extremism.
Somalia’s federal justice system is deeply politicized, arbitrary, and undermines the social contract between the government and citizens. Opposition leaders and high-level defectors from Al-Shabaab are handled outside formal legal procedures, receiving impunity or selective treatment, while rank-and-file jihadists face rapid trials and death sentences. Notable cases include Hassan Dahir Aweys, Mohamed Said ‘Atam’, Zakaria Ismaa’iil Ahmed, and Mukhtar Robow, all of whom surrendered or were detained yet never faced proper trial, often receiving comfortable accommodation or government positions. Political opposition figures endure even harsher treatment, including assassination attempts. Abdirashid ‘Janan’, former Jubaland security minister, exemplifies the system’s capricious nature arrested, escaped, led resistance, and later officially acquitted after a secret deal. This selective application of justice highlights a federal system that functions more as a marketplace for favors, influence, and power than a rule-of-law institution. Public confidence in the judiciary has eroded, with many citizens viewing the predictably harsh, though impartial, justice of Al-Shabaab as more reliable. The systemic politicization of Somalia’s courts underscores the urgent need for reform, accountability, and a genuine commitment to legal fairness to restore governance and public trust.