By Ahmed A. Yusuf

The Speaker of the House of the People of Somalia, Sheikh Adan Madoobe, has faced mounting criticism in recent months. Accusations of bypassing parliamentary rules and enabling undue federal executive influence over legislative processes have dominated discussions. However, such criticism often oversimplifies the Speaker’s role and overlooks the broader dysfunction within Somalia’s parliamentary system.

 

 

A deeper analysis reveals systemic challenges, including the quality and independence of parliamentarians, that limit the Speaker’s ability to enforce procedural integrity.

A Parliament Unlike Any Other

The current sitting 11th Parliament of Somalia is unprecedented in its composition, featuring a new wave of MPs whose behavior and motivations have raised serious concerns about legislative integrity. Majority of the MPs, with the exception of some Jubaland Representatives and small number from the other FMS, have openly demonstrated susceptibility to financial incentives, often prioritizing personal gain over constitutional responsibilities. This has raised an environment where loyalty to the executive, rather than adherence to the rule of law or the interests of their constituency, dominates decision-making.

In such a context, the Speaker’s actions must be evaluated with an understanding of his limited authority. While the Speaker is the figurehead of the House, he operates within a political culture where a majority of MPs prioritize expediency and self-interest over procedural rules and public accountability. Rumors circulating in Somalia suggest that President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud is paying over 100 MPs an illegal monthly stipend of $2,000, in addition to their regular salaries, as a means of securing their loyalty.

On top of the above noted sellouts, President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud appointed around 59 members to the cabinet with the view to buy their loyalty and to recruit at least one MP from his clan when there are activities of interest is tabled, and continues to curry favor with approximately 40 other MPs by granting their family members high-profile positions such as ambassadors, director generals, and other influential roles. In essence, he has solidified his control over the vast majority of MPs through manipulative and morally questionable tactics reminiscent of mafia-style coercion.

It is a remarkable and troubling development that Puntland representatives have completely surrendered to the whims of President Hassan, despite being fully aware that their Federal Member State has publicly disowned the constitutional amendments. This acquiescence not only undermines the autonomy of Puntland but also raises serious questions about the integrity and independence of its representatives in the face of national decisions that directly conflict with the stance of their own administration. Despite these systemic challenges, the Speaker—regardless of his intentions—finds himself constrained by MPs who have aligned themselves with these unethical practices. Yet, ironically, they still unjustly place the blame on him for the dysfunction within Parliament. “Believe me, even the esteemed speakers of Parliaments 9 and 10, the late Professor Jawari and Speaker Mursal, would have struggled to control this new wave of Parliament 11 MPs, who seem to be exempt from morality and responsibility. This is a curse upon a nation that is already suffering.”

The controversy surrounding the approval of four chapters of the Provisional Federal Constitution in March 2024, without any consultations with its stake holders exemplifies these dynamics. Initially, over 100 MPs, led by respected figures such as Hon. Abdisalaan Dhabanacad, the late Senator Mohamed Yusuf Gaagaab, and Hon. Abdi qaybdiid, appearing on TVs publicly opposed the amendments and pledging they will vote it down. However, on the day of the vote, these same MPs inexplicably reversed their positions and endorsed the amendments, despite widespread recognition of their illegitimacy. This reversal occurred with full awareness that the Presidents of Jubaland and Puntland Federal Member States had publicly disowned the amendments, condemning them as a “one-man constitution.”

This reversal highlights the pervasive influence of financial and political pressures within the House. Blaming the Speaker for this outcome disregards the systemic flaws that allow MPs to compromise their principles for personal or political gain.

 

 

Another contentious decision was the approval of the Turkish-Somalia defense agreement. MPs voted overwhelmingly in favor without ever seeing the agreement’s text, raising serious questions about parliamentary diligence and accountability. Once again, this decision reflects broader issues within the legislature. While the Speaker presides over sessions, he cannot compel MPs to fulfill their responsibilities when the majority willingly abdicates them.

The approval of the controversial Election and Borders Commission followed a similar pattern. Procedural rules were bypassed to expedite the process, with MPs from Somaliland, Southwest State, Hirshabelle, Galmudug, and Puntland supporting the federal executive’s agenda. Only MPs from Jubaland opposed the move, reflecting a principled stand against the flawed process.

Here too, the Speaker’s role was limited by the collective will of the majority. Criticism of his leadership overlooks the complicity of MPs who actively participated in subverting parliamentary procedures and the constitution. The tendency to scapegoat Speaker Sheikh Adan Madoobe reflects a misunderstanding of his role within Somalia’s parliamentary framework. As been one MP among many, his authority is inherently constrained by the collective decisions of the House. When a majority of MPs prioritize personal or political interests over procedural integrity, the Speaker’s ability to enforce rules becomes almost impossible without risking a complete breakdown of parliamentary operations.

The recent approval of Somalia’s flawed election law underscores the collective responsibility of parliamentarians in perpetuating legislative dysfunction. MPs from Somaliland, Southwest State, Hirshabelle, Galmudug, and Puntland overwhelmingly supported the legislation, despite its shortcomings and potential to undermine democratic processes. In contrast, MPs from Jubaland distanced themselves, reflecting their commitment to upholding the Provisional Federal Constitution and the wish of their constituents.

This pattern of compliance among the majority highlights the influence of external pressures and financial incentives. Rather than acting as representatives of their constituents, many MPs align with the federal executive’s agenda, undermining public trust in Somalia’s democratic institutions.The grim reality of land grabs in Somalia highlights a deeply troubling issue that goes beyond the moral failings of sitting Members of Parliament (MPs) and exposes their active or passive complicity in a widespread and harmful practice. While neglecting their legislative duties, many MPs have also failed to address the urgent crisis of land grabs, which has led to the unlawful eviction of countless poor families residing on unused public land.

This practice is not merely a violation of property rights; it constitutes a direct assault on some of the most vulnerable members of society, particularly families of the Somali National Army (SNA), who are disproportionately affected. Alarmingly, this crisis has displaced nearly 500,000 individuals, forcing them to join the ranks of internally displaced persons (IDPs). These newly displaced communities now face extreme hardships, grappling with limited resources, lack of protection, and ongoing insecurity. The inaction—or worse, complicity—of MPs in this matter represents a profound failure of governance and a betrayal of the very people they are sworn to serve.

Despite their mandate to represent and protect the public, most MPs have chosen to remain passive observers of this injustice. Instead of raising their voices or taking meaningful action to stop these evictions, the majority have allowed the unlawful activities to proceed unchecked. A few exceptions, such as Hon. Abdirahman Abdi Shakur, Hon. Dr. Abdulahi Hashi Abiib and MPs from Jubaland, have courageously spoken out against the land grab (3) Video | Facebook . However, their efforts stand in plain contrast to the general lack of collective action within the legislative body to defend the rights of those affected.

Further complicating the situation is the fact that many influential MPs are allegedly involved in the land grab scheme themselves. Reports suggest that some MPs facilitate the sale of public land, while others benefit directly, receiving commissions or being rewarded with plots. Such complicity severely undermines the credibility of the parliamentary system. These MPs are not merely neglecting their duties; they are actively profiting from the exploitation of vulnerable populations.

This systemic inaction paints a bleak picture of a corrupt and dysfunctional political system. Rather than serving the public good, MPs are contributing to the displacement of the poor and the entrenchment of inequality. By remaining silent—or worse, engaging in the land grabs themselves—they fail in their primary duty to uphold the rights and well-being of their constituents. The widespread lack of accountability and the active participation of lawmakers in these schemes highlight a broader culture of corruption, where political power is leveraged for personal enrichment at the expense of the many.

In light of this, can the Speaker of Parliament truly be blamed for the inhumane and reprehensible acts perpetrated by these MPs—acts that monetize the suffering of the very people they pledged to protect? The unfortunate reality is that the majority of the MPs in the 11th Parliament are, for the most part, irresponsible individuals who lack compassion, integrity, and decency.

Impeachment Motion Against President Hassan Sheikh: A Lone Warrior’s Uphill Battle

On January 21, 2025, Hon. Dr. Abdillahi Hashi Abiib, a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of the People, submitted an impeachment motion against President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud to the Speaker of the Federal Parliament of Somalia MP Dr Abdillahi Hashi Abib on X: “MOOSHIN XIL-KA-QAADIS MADAXWEYNE & DIGNIIN GUDDOONKA BARLAMAANKA” / X . The motion, signed by over 94 MPs, represents another bold attempt by Dr. Abdillahi to hold Somalia’s leadership accountable. However, given historical precedent, its chances of progressing appear slim.

For the past two years, Hon. Dr. Abdillahi has earned a reputation as a dedicated reformist, consistently moving motions aimed at addressing corruption, mismanagement, and lack of accountability within the government. Despite his determination, none of these motions have ever advanced to a parliamentary debate or vote. The repeated failure of these motions is rooted in a familiar pattern: MPs who initially sign and endorse Dr. Abdillahi’s efforts frequently retract their support before the motions reach the Desk of the Speaker. This withdrawal typically occurs in the final stages, rendering the motions void and thwarting any chance of scrutiny or accountability.

 As is customary among Somalia’s MPs, the inevitable failure of this impeachment motion will likely be followed by an all-too-familiar blame game. The Speaker, Sheikh Adan Madoobe, will be cast as the convenient scapegoat, allowing MPs to deflect responsibility for their own actions—or lack thereof. By portraying the Speaker as the primary obstacle, they skillfully absolve themselves of any accountability in derailing the motion.

A Misplaced Blame Game

The criticisms leveled against Speaker Sheikh Adan Madoobe must be viewed in the broader context of a deeply flawed parliamentary system. While everyone understands he bears no responsibility as the leader of the House,  the root of the problem lies in the behavior and priorities of the MPs themselves. The rushed approvals of constitutional amendments, defense agreements, Election law and the Election Commission were collective actions that reflect a culture of compliance and self-interest among legislators.

Reforming Somalia’s political system requires shifting the focus from blaming individuals to addressing structural flaws. Rebuilding trust in Somalia’s legislative process requires a collective effort to address the systemic issues that enable dysfunction. Key steps include ensuring all parliamentary decisions, including agreements and constitutional amendments, are subjected to thorough debate and review, establishing mechanisms to hold MPs accountable for their votes and actions, particularly when procedural rules are bypassed and promoting a culture of ethical governance and reducing the influence of financial incentives in legislative processes.

Ahmed A. Yusuf
Email: aayuusuf44@gmail.com
————
Related articles:

Inside the FP leadership, corruption and scandal: the case of Speaker Adan Mohamed (Madobe)- part II By Abdullahi A Nor

Inside the Federal Parliament of Somalia leadership: The case of Sadia Yasin Samatar- Corruption, Scandal, and Bloodshed in Somali Politics By Abdullahi A. Nor