Mogadishu (WDN) — President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud has triggered widespread debate on Somali social media after telling lawmakers from the Justice and Solidarity Party (JSP), his own political organisation, that there would be no consultation over the contentious issues facing the country.

The president made the remarks during a meeting with JSP-affiliated members of parliament. Speaking about public calls for him to seek consensus on disputed national matters, he reportedly said: “To those telling me, ‘President Hassan, put the matter to consultation and involve people in the disputed issues,’ I want to make it clear: there will be no such consultation.”

The statement quickly became a subject of intense discussion online, with critics interpreting it as an outright rejection of dialogue at a time when Somalia remains deeply divided over the electoral process and the country’s political future.

For many observers, the controversy goes beyond a single remark. It raises serious questions about the president’s willingness to accommodate opposing views, build political consensus and lead a country whose federal system depends on negotiations among competing political stakeholders.

Some social media users also questioned the judgment behind such an uncompromising public statement. However, the remarks alone do not establish anything about the president’s mental health or sanity; the more immediate issue is their political meaning and potential consequences.

Lawmakers’ applause draws criticism

The response of lawmakers attending the meeting also attracted criticism. According to the account circulated online, JSP-affiliated legislators applauded the president rather than challenging or questioning his rejection of consultation.

Critics argue that the reaction illustrates the dangers of a political environment in which governing-party lawmakers may be more concerned with maintaining their positions than representing the concerns of their constituents.

Opponents further allege that some legislators favour an election process shaped by the president because they fear losing their seats in a genuinely competitive, transparent and credible contest. These are political accusations, however, and would require independent evidence to establish the individual motives of the lawmakers concerned.

The controversy comes amid wider disputes over the proposed transition to direct, one-person-one-vote elections and disagreements about the legitimacy, timing and administration of the process.

A rejection of consensus?

The phrase that drew the strongest reaction was the president’s reported declaration that there would be no consultation. In a country where disputes over elections, constitutional arrangements and the division of political authority have repeatedly generated tension, the language was widely perceived by critics as confrontational.

Somalia’s political stability depends not only on holding elections but also on ensuring that the rules are accepted by the principal political stakeholders. When major decisions are perceived to be imposed unilaterally, the risk of parallel political processes, institutional confrontation and further fragmentation increases.

During the meeting, Hassan Sheikh also discussed strengthening cooperation with supportive lawmakers, the role of parliamentarians in advancing state-building and preparations for the direct-election system he is pursuing.

Yet critics say that cooperation within the president’s own political camp cannot substitute for broader national consultation. An electoral process that enjoys the support of governing-party allies but lacks wider political agreement risks deepening the very divisions it is supposed to resolve.

The central question is therefore not whether the president can secure applause from his supporters, but whether his administration can build sufficient trust to ensure that Somalia’s next political transition is credible, inclusive and peaceful.

For a country already facing serious political divisions, the president’s reported rejection of consultation has become a test of leadership. Whether the statement reflects a deliberate political strategy or was an ill-judged expression of frustration, its consequences will depend on whether the administration chooses confrontation or returns to meaningful dialogue.

WardheerNews