Mogadishu/Garowe, SOMALIA — Puntland-based political parties have categorically rejected participation in President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s Consultative Conference in Mogadishu, exposing an elaborate charade designed to create an illusion of national consensus for international consumption. The conference, ostensibly convened to address the international community’s demands for agreement on electoral processes, constitutional reform, and federal structures, has instead devolved into what opposition figures characterize as a thinly veiled attempt to legitimize the president’s controversial political maneuvers through staged participation and selective attendance.
Two Puntland-based political parties—Ifiye and Mideeye—have categorically rejected the claims that they have sent representatives to the Mogadishu Conference.
The conference’s origins trace back to sustained pressure from international partners—particularly the United Nations, the African Union, and key Western donors—who have grown increasingly alarmed by Somalia’s political fragmentation and the unilateral actions that have characterized Hassan Sheikh’s second term. These partners, whose financial and security support remains crucial to the Federal Government’s survival, demanded a genuine national dialogue to address three critical issues: the electoral framework for future elections, the controversial constitutional amendments pushed through in March 2024, and the federal structure, particularly the contested addition of SSC-Khatumo as a federal member state without the constitutionally required consensus.
The Transformation of Institutional Mechanisms
The metamorphosis of the National Consultative Council (NCC) from a consensus-building mechanism into a political party loyal to the president represents a fundamental perversion of Somalia’s institutional architecture. The NCC, originally conceived as a neutral forum where the Federal Government and federal member state leaders could forge consensus on critical national issues, has under Hassan Sheikh’s leadership become an instrument of executive dominance.
President Hassan Sheikh has effectively eliminated one of the few remaining forums for genuine federal-state dialogue, replacing it with a structure that serves primarily to legitimize predetermined outcomes. The expanded format now being employed—incorporating selected political parties, civil society organizations, and traditional elders—creates an appearance of broader consultation while carefully excluding voices likely to challenge the government’s narrative.
The international community’s insistence on inclusive dialogue stems from hard-learned lessons about the consequences of political exclusion in Somalia. The violence that erupted in Mogadishu in April 2021, when former President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmaajo attempted to extend his term through parliamentary manipulation, served as a stark reminder of how quickly political disputes can escalate into armed conflict in Somalia’s fragmented landscape. That crisis, which saw opposition forces seize portions of the capital and brought the country to the brink of renewed civil war, was ultimately resolved only through the intervention of traditional elders and intense international pressure.
The Ifiye and Mideeye Controversy
False claims about representatives from the Ifiye and Mideeye parties attending the Mogadishu conference have ignited fierce controversy within Puntland’s political circles, where these parties have historically maintained strong regional roots and alignment with Puntland’s autonomist stance. Both parties have categorically denied any participation in the conference, with party leaders denouncing the claims as fabrications designed to create an illusion of Puntland representation.
The Mideeye party, led by former Foreign Affairs Minister Abshir Huruse, has been particularly vocal in its rejection of the claims and its continued support for Puntland’s democratic processes, having participated in the historic agreement that saw Puntland’s political parties unite to hold delayed elections in the Nugaal region despite obstruction from forces allegedly backed by Mogadishu. The party’s firm denial of any participation in Hassan Sheikh’s conference has reinforced observations about the Federal Government’s tactics of creating false narratives of support.
“We categorically deny that any representative of Mideeye is participating in the Mogadishu charade,” stated a senior party official.
Similarly, Ifiye party leadership issued a statement firmly rejecting any association with the conference, warning that false claims of their participation represent a deliberate attempt to undermine Puntland’s unity and create artificial divisions within the regional political ecosystem.
The Constitutional Crisis Deepens
The Mogadishu conference occurs against the backdrop of Somalia’s most severe constitutional crisis since the adoption of the provisional constitution in 2012. The amendments rammed through parliament in March 2024—extending the presidential term from four to five years, expanding executive powers at the expense of the prime minister, and fundamentally altering the balance between federal and regional authorities—remain a source of bitter contention. These changes, achieved through what critics describe as a combination of bribery, intimidation, and procedural manipulation, have shattered the delicate consensus that underpinned Somalia’s federal system.
The addition of SSC-Khatumo as a federal member state without the constitutionally mandated consensus represents another fracture in Somalia’s political foundation. While the aspirations of the SSC-Khatumo community for recognition deserve respect, the manner of their elevation—through unilateral presidential decree rather than the inclusive process outlined in the provisional constitution—has created dangerous precedents. Other regions and communities now eye similar recognition, potentially fragmenting Somalia into ever-smaller units while the fundamental questions of resource-sharing, security cooperation, and political representation remain unresolved.
The international community’s demand for dialogue on these constitutional issues reflects growing alarm about Somalia’s democratic trajectory. The changes pushed through in March not only violated procedural norms but fundamentally altered the social contract between citizens and state, between federal and regional authorities, and between executive and legislative branches. The extension of the presidential term, in particular, has raised red flags among international observers who see parallels with other African nations where constitutional manipulation has served as a gateway to authoritarian rule.
