By Halima Ismail Ibrahim
Since the collapse of Somalia’s military regime in 1991, the country’s political landscape has been defined by severe conflict, structural instability, and ongoing security challenges. Yet, amidst this volatility, the nation established a rare and essential political precedent: the peaceful transfer of executive power. Through successive electoral cycles, incoming and outgoing administrations, despite intense disagreements and efforts by incumbent leaders to prolong their mandates, ultimately acquiesced to negotiated political settlements. This recurring consensus became the bedrock of modern Somali state-building and a safeguard against total systemic collapse.
That tradition now faces a pivotal crisis under President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, who unilaterally extended his term following its expiration on May 15, 2026. Under the guise of an ambitious transition to universal suffrage, his administration is promoting a “one-person, one-vote” model, but a centralizing tactic to mask an autocratic power grab.
However, beneath this democratic narrative of universal suffrage lies a strategic initiative to alter the political timetable. Through a combination of political pressure, or toppling defiant regional leaders, and golden parachute packages for compliant ones, President Hassan has centralized authority to hand pick leadership successions across Federal Member States under his Justice and Solidarity Party (JSP) flagship.
In a number of dominant-party or authoritarian political systems, the ruling party often establishes, sponsors, or encourages the formation of smaller satellite parties to create the appearance of political pluralism and competitive elections. While these parties formally participate in the electoral process, they generally pose little or no genuine challenge to the governing party. Instead, they are frequently allocated a limited number of parliamentary seats and once elected, consistently support the ruling party’s legislative agenda. Variations of this political model have been observed in countries such as Djibouti, Uganda, and Comoros.
Viewed from this perspective, I find it surprising that some observers now argue that the Towfiiq Party was unfairly treated. If there is evidence that the party was denied seats in Mogadishu and South West State, it is reasonable to ask why these concerns were not raised with the same urgency at the time those events allegedly occurred.
The current developments in Galmudug appear to raise similar questions, suggesting that the issues being debated today may not be new but rather part of a broader and more consistent political pattern.
Equally important are the questions surrounding the formation and political alignment of the JSP, including whether it genuinely represented Ahlu Sunna Wal Jama’a or was instead associated with individuals aligned with Sheikh Mohamud. Likewise, if Sheikh Shakir had exercised decisive political influence over the process, one might reasonably question whether the current outcome would have unfolded in the same manner.
More broadly, the current debate illustrates an important lesson about dominant-party systems. The existence of multiple political parties does not, by itself, guarantee meaningful political competition. The essential question is whether those parties operate independently and possess a genuine capacity to compete for power. Where opposition parties are dependent on, aligned with, or ultimately supportive of the ruling party, the electoral process may project the image of democratic competition while leaving the underlying balance of political power fundamentally unchanged.
For this reason, evaluating the credibility of an electoral process requires looking beyond the number of parties participating. It requires careful examination of the independence of political actors, the fairness of the electoral environment, and whether elections provide voters with a genuine opportunity to choose among competing political alternatives.
Moreover, consistency is essential. If similar concerns arise across different regions and electoral processes, they should be assessed according to the same standards rather than only when they affect a particular part of a political constituency.
Halima Ismail Ibrahim (Xalima Yarey)
Email: halimai@yahoo.com