Hey everyone! Happy new year, etc. Apologies about the video quality and the lack of editing. I know it’s not super polished, but I want to get my ideas out to you as soon as possible. Hope you don’t mind the casual style—it’s all about the content, right? Thanks for sticking with me, and I promise to level up the production in the future! 😊
A bad one person one vote (1P1V) election, while flawed, can still serve as a mechanism to reflect public will and maintain political continuity, offering a foundation for reform and improvement. Conversely, no election or the current 4.5 model-based selections, deny Somali citizens their voice entirely, often leading to stagnation, autocracy, or conflict. This has always been my position, remains to be the case today and the essence of my video message.
Historical experience supports this perspective. Winston Churchill famously remarked, "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried." This highlights that even imperfect democratic processes are preferable to the absence of participation or representation. 1P1V elections, even when flawed, provide an opportunity for dialogue, accountability, and the gradual refinement of governance.
Political theorists like John Stuart Mill emphasized the importance of participation in shaping informed citizenry. As he stated in On Liberty, "The worth of a state in the long run is the worth of the individuals composing it." Even in flawed elections, individuals engage with political systems, fostering an environment where reform and progress remain possible.
In essence, while bad elections can undermine trust and effectiveness, their very existence sustains the framework of democracy, which can be strengthened through collective efforts, protests, and institutional reform. The 4.5 model-based Somali elections often lead to the absence of hope for change, creating an environment where oppression thrives unchecked.
We have been there before and done it… and yes, we can do it again.
A Historical perspective of the evolution of Somali Elections
The history of Somali elections1 reflects the country’s broader political evolution, shaped by colonial administration, clan dynamics, and international interventions. From the 1950s to today, Somalia's electoral processes have transitioned through periods of limited democracy, authoritarian rule, and efforts at reconstruction.
Colonial Administration and Early Elections (1950–1960) : Under United Nations Trusteeship in the 1950s, Somalia was administered by Italy in the south and Britain in the north. During this period, the Somali Youth League (SYL) emerged as a nationalist movement advocating for independence and political representation. The first elections, conducted in 1956 under Italian trusteeship, established a legislative assembly dominated by the SYL, albeit with limited suffrage.
Post-Independence and Democratic Experimentation (1960–1969) : With independence in 1960, Somalia united British Somaliland and Italian Somaliland. The SYL continued its dominance in the 1964 parliamentary elections. However, political instability, driven by clan rivalries, undermined governance. In 1967, Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke was elected president, but his assassination in 1969 led to a crisis. Democratic processes ended with a military coup led by Siad Barre in October 1969, ushering in authoritarian rule.
Authoritarian Rule and Electoral Suppression (1969–1991) : Siad Barre's regime dissolved political parties, suspended the constitution, and centralized power under a single-party system. Elections were eliminated, and governance relied on authoritarianism, clan manipulation, and socialist rhetoric. Although a new constitution was adopted in 1979, it was largely symbolic. The regime collapsed in 1991, triggering civil war and the disintegration of centralized governance.
Civil War and the Electoral Void (1991–2000) : Following Barre’s fall, Somalia fragmented into territories controlled by clan militias, with no central authority or electoral processes. In contrast, Somaliland declared independence (not internationally recognized) and established a functioning democratic system, including regular elections. Southern Somalia, however, lacked governance structures, plunging into prolonged conflict.
Rebuilding Electoral Systems (2000–2012) : International mediation in the early 2000s led to the Transitional National Government (TNG) in 2000 and its successor, the Transitional Federal Government (TFG). A federal charter adopted in 2004 laid the foundation for a federal system. In 2012, the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) was established, and indirect elections saw Hassan Sheikh Mohamud elected as president, marking a significant step toward political stability. See table below for more details.
Recent Elections and Continuing Challenges (2012–2023) : Since 2012, Somalia’s elections have been indirect, based on clan representation. The 2016 elections expanded participation, resulting in the election of Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed ("Farmaajo"). In 2022, Hassan Sheikh Mohamud was re-elected, becoming the first president to serve non-consecutive terms. Challenges persist, including clan-based politics, Al-Shabaab insurgency, and delays in transitioning to universal suffrage.
To conclude, Somalia’s electoral history underscores the interplay of historical legacies, clan structures, and external influences. Despite progress, achieving sustainable democracy remains challenging. Strengthened institutions, improved security, and inclusive governance are vital to the country’s democratic aspirations. Somaliland’s contrasting stability highlights the potential for electoral development, even amid broader national challenges.
Comments, feedback as always welcome.
Share this post