In an act of defiance, the Jubaland administration asserts its independence by scheduling its presidential and parliamentary elections by November 25, 2024, just a week away. This bold step directly counters the Federal Government of Somalia’s (FGS) contentious actions, particularly its passage of a partisan electoral commission bill on Saturday. Passed without consulting key federal member states like Puntland and Jubaland, the bill has sparked widespread criticism and amplified tensions in the federal landscape.
The Jubaland electoral commission’s move undermines President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s strategy of using the prospect of direct elections to justify delays in the electoral process and secure an extension of his mandate. By taking control of its own electoral timeline, Jubaland nullifies these efforts and lays bare the FGS’s alleged claims of fostering democratic reform, exposing them as hollow and self-serving.
A Partisan Bill
The electoral commission bill passed by the FGS Parliament has been widely criticized as a partisan attempt to undermine the principles of federalism and regional autonomy enshrined in Somalia’s provisional constitution. The creation of a commission without the participation and consent of vital federal member states like Puntland and Jubaland is a clear indication of the FGS’s willingness to bypass constitutional norms and impose its will on the regions.
This latest development is part of a broader pattern of the FGS’s efforts to centralize power and extend its mandate at the expense of the federal member states. President Hassan Sheikh’s administration has repeatedly pushed for electoral delays, using the promise of direct elections as a pretext to prolong its term in office. These actions have strained relations between the FGS and the federal member states, fueling concerns about the erosion of Somalia’s nascent federal system.
Jubaland’s decision to hold its own elections is a signal that it will not be intimidated or coerced into accepting the FGS’s unilateral decisions on the electoral process. By asserting its constitutional rights and proceeding with its own timeline, Jubaland has called the FGS’s bluff and exposed the insincerity of its claims to be working towards genuine democratic reform.
A Puzzling Inconsistency
Prime Minister Hamza Barre’s statement today questioning President Ahmed Madobe’s mandate to hold elections in Jubaland has raised eyebrows and sparked accusations of inconsistency and political opportunism. The prime minister’s remarks are particularly puzzling given that Madobe was a participant in the National Consultative Council (NCC) meetings, where key decisions on the electoral process were made.
If the FGS genuinely believed that Madobe lacked legitimacy, it is unclear why he was allowed to take part in these high-level discussions and play a role in shaping the country’s electoral future. The fact that his mandate is only being questioned now, in the wake of Jubaland’s defiant stance against the FGS’s partisan electoral commission bill, suggests that the prime minister’s comments are politically motivated rather than based on genuine concerns about constitutional norms or democratic legitimacy.
This inconsistency underscores the political nature of the FGS’s attacks on Jubaland and its leadership. Rather than being rooted in a sincere commitment to upholding the rule of law and promoting democratic values, these attacks appear to be driven by a desire to weaken and isolate Jubaland, which has long been a thorn in the side of the central government.
