By Abdullahi Ahmed Nor

President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud’s recent Independence Day speech, delivered with patriotic flair and public optimism, sought to reinforce Somalia’s quest for democratic governance and national unity. But for many Somalis and political observers, his message concealed a more assertive and troubling agenda. Beneath the soaring rhetoric lay a confrontational tone that left little room for dissent: “It’s my way or the highway.”

While reaffirming his administration’s commitment to holding one-person, one-vote (1P1V) elections, the president issued what many interpreted as a thinly veiled ultimatum to his political challengers. “No politician can stop us from holding elections based on one-person, one-vote,” he declared, leaving no ambiguity as to his intentions. That statement, delivered just days ahead of the much-anticipated July 3 consultative meeting between Villa Somalia and major opposition leaders, has cast serious doubts on the event’s viability. Many now see the meeting as dead-on arrival.

The president’s speech, far from being an invitation to dialogue, appeared to shut the door on any competing proposals. Though he claimed to be open to “corrections” and constructive feedback, he qualified this by insisting such inputs must come through “proper channels”—a phrase that, in Somalia’s current political landscape, is often interpreted as a euphemism for submission to central authority.

A Unifying Call Wrapped in Contradiction

President Hassan also used the platform to extend an emotional appeal to Somaliland, calling for reconciliation and unity. “We love you; we miss you,” he said, urging the breakaway region to return to Somalia’s national fold. But even this was laced with rigidity. Somalia, he emphasized, is “one and indivisible,” shutting the door on any meaningful negotiation or a federal-style compromise that acknowledges Somaliland’s longstanding grievances.

This tension between rhetoric and reality is emblematic of the broader contradictions that define Hassan Sheikh’s administration. His words of inclusion are frequently accompanied by political actions that exclude. Calls for democracy are paired with moves that undermine its foundational principles.

The Elephant in the Room: Constitutional Amendments and Electoral Engineering

Much of the political unrest in Somalia stems from the president’s controversial overhaul of the provisional constitution. Earlier last year, the government pushed through amendments that dramatically reshaped the balance of power, effectively concentrating more authority in the hands of the presidency. These amendments were drafted and ratified without broad-based national consultation or participation from Federal Member States (FMS), civil society groups, or opposition parties.

Among the most contested changes were revisions to Articles 54 and 120, which touch upon the allocation of power and the terms of federal mandates. Critics argue these amendments weaken federalism, extend the executive’s reach, and threaten the spirit of cooperative governance.

To make matters worse, the president recently established a new National Electoral Commission—crowned unilaterally by Villa Somalia without parliamentary vetting or consultations with the Federal Member States. The commission’s legitimacy has been challenged by a wide spectrum of political actors who view it as a rubber stamp for Hassan Sheikh’s electoral agenda.

Opposition leaders and regional presidents have decried the move, arguing that an electoral body imposed without consensus will never earn public trust or be able to oversee free and fair elections. The commission’s perceived lack of independence has become a flashpoint in the wider political struggle.

Clashing with Federalism and Regional Autonomy

Key Federal Member States such as Puntland and Jubaland have already distanced themselves from the president’s electoral blueprint. Puntland has refused to recognize the constitutional amendments or the electoral commission and has withdrawn from participating in federal-level political processes until meaningful consultation is restored.

Jubaland, meanwhile, has insisted that elections must be held in accordance with the provisional constitution and through mechanisms agreed upon by all stakeholders. There are even whispers of boycotts and regional referendums if Villa Somalia proceeds unilaterally.

Even within traditionally aligned states like Galmudug, South West, and Hirshabelle—where sitting presidents lack legitimate mandates and have joined President Hassan’s Justice and Unity Partyunease is quietly simmering. Many local officials believe the president’s approach ignores the complex realities on the ground, particularly the absence of functioning security infrastructure, inadequate electoral preparedness, and a deep erosion of public trust.

Notably, the presidents of Galmudug, South West State, and Hirshabelle—Ahmed Qoorqoor, Abdiaziz Laftagareen, and Ali Gudlaawe, respectively—have essentially surrendered their political agency to Villa Somalia. These leaders have distanced themselves from the national debate and have ceded decision-making authority to President Hassan without engaging their constituents or defending the federal principles that underpin Somalia’s governance structure. As a result, they have become peripheral figures, included in key political processes only at the discretion of Villa Somalia.

Somalia’s federal system was specifically designed to prevent this kind of political centralization. The current administration’s disregard for regional autonomy not only violates the spirit of federalism but also deepens divisions that threaten national cohesion. With only two of the five Federal Member States functioning independently, President Hassan’s call for Somaliland to rejoin the “chaos club” seems not only ill-timed but ironically out of touch. If anything, more FMS may be eyeing pathways to increased autonomy—or even full independence—rather than embracing a federal government they see as overreaching and unaccountable.

Public Sentiment: Growing Unease and Activism

While the president asserts public support for his reform agenda, signs of grassroots opposition continue to grow. University students, civil society organizations, and independent media voices have raised concerns over the pace, process, and transparency of electoral reforms. Some student groups have staged demonstrations calling for a more inclusive approach to democratization.

Despite these protests, the federal government has remained largely unyielding. Somali civil society, although active and vocal, fears a similar clampdown on domestic dissent as seen in other nations. However, the federal government’s reliance on international handouts for nearly three decades severely limits its capacity to exert coercive pressure.

The July 6 meeting, once hailed as a potential turning point, appears increasingly symbolic. With the president’s firm declarations preceding it, the consultation risks becoming a mere box-ticking exercise. Opposition leaders are trapped between engaging in a seemingly pre-determined process or disengaging entirely—at the risk of further alienation.

The Warning Signs of Authoritarian Drift

Somalia’s transition to democracy was always expected to be turbulent. But the current trajectory suggests not just turbulence, but a potential derailment. The consolidation of power under the guise of reform is a familiar pattern seen in many young democracies. It begins with emergency powers, followed by weakened institutions, and ends with the erosion of dissent.

In just two years, President Hassan’s administration has dissolved several oversight bodies, circumvented parliamentary protocols, and pushed major legislative changes with little or no debate. While he champions democracy in speeches, the mechanisms of that democracy are being subtly hollowed out.

What Path Forward?

To salvage legitimacy and restore public confidence, several urgent steps are necessary. First, the president must suspend the implementation of the controversial constitutional amendments and electoral commission until an inclusive national dialogue can be held. Second, the July 6 consultative meeting should be repurposed from a ceremonial gathering into a genuine negotiation forum.

This means not only inviting the opposition but also listening to them—and acting on their concerns. Regional leaders must be treated as equal partners, not subordinate administrators. Civil society should have a seat at the table. And independent observers—local and international—must be empowered to monitor progress.

Lastly, the federal government must recommit to the principles of the provisional constitution, including respect for federalism, term limits, and the separation of powers. Without these foundational pillars, no electoral roadmap will be credible or sustainable.

Wrap Up

President Hassan Sheikh’s Independence Day speech was meant to inspire unity and national pride. But its underlying message—a refusal to compromise—has sent shockwaves through the political establishment. By declaring that “no one can stop us” from implementing 1P1V elections, the president has risked converting a noble democratic goal into a politically polarizing project.

Unless there is a course correction—and quickly—Somalia may find itself on the brink of another political crisis. The dream of a unified, democratic Somalia governed by the will of the people remains alive. But it cannot be realized through unilateralism. True reform demands inclusion, consultation, and compromise. Otherwise, the president’s call for unity may be remembered not as a rallying cry, but as a warning unheeded.

Abdullahi Ahmed Nor
Email: abdulahinor231@gmail.com