Hiiraan Online

by Said Farah
Friday, April 10, 2009

With all those troubles and pains encountered in the last two decades, we should posses the courage and the patience to analyze the origins of those problems, draw lessons from it, and avoid coming across it again in the future for betterment of our people and our country.

By the way, it is not wise for most of our learned class to spend all the time long in describing of how those shocking events took place, pondering on minor issues in it while ignoring to address factors behind the existing dilemma on the purpose of extracting proper solution for it.

For many of us, the system of government practiced in post-independence era (unitary system) was one of the major factors that contributed most in fueling tensions and building mistrust among different segments of our society before finally igniting into full-scale civil war. It is by this system, according to this group, which facilitated the unfair distribution of wealth and unjust allocation of government sponsored developmental projects across regions and hence led to endless crisis we live until today.

So going back again to exercise the same unitary system in the new government of Somalia is certainly, according to them, a political suicide and a nation disaster that need to be avoided at any cost.

Nonetheless, before concluding, let us first define the difference between the two mostly employed systems for administering of nations to realize the influence of our past system in feeding public outrage and disobedience and thus finally leading to the crash of our state before plunging our nation into a long and meaningless civil war.

1. Unitary system:
• In unitary system, the constitution concentrates political powers and authority in the national government. Legislative power vested in the Parliament, executive power in the President, and judicial power in the Supreme Court and lower courts.
• The President, as the head of government, is the chief executive and

                       Commander in chief of the armed forces. S/he has general supervision

                       over local governments (the provinces, cities, municipalities, which are

                        weak and dependent on the national government.                  

• All major laws and policies are passed by Parliament and approved by the

                       President who is responsible for implementing them through his/her

                       control of the executive departments and agencies and the bureaucracy, and         

                       general supervision over the local governments.

2. Federal System
• Federalism is a system of government whose primary feature, defined in its constitution, is the distribution of powers between a central or national authority (the federal government) and regional governments or states with their local governments.

• Federalism emphasizes respect for the socio-cultural diversity of the people and seeks national unity in regional diversity. It promotes national solidarity and cooperation in governance, nation building, modernization, and development.

·         Federalism emphasizes regional and local self-rule and self-reliance in governance. This means that decisions should be made at the lowest possible level where the problems can be solved.

·         While regional or state governments are designed to be autonomous in their regional and local affairs in relation to the federal government, the federal government provides assistance to the various regions and states, especially the less developed ones, as in all federal systems in the world.

Weaknesses of Unitary System in our Past

Those of us who are familiar with our troubled past know too well that regional alienation, corruption, squander, indifference to suffering in other regions, lack of equal development etc. have been facilitated by political control from the centre. Therefore, those in power, with no exception had little incentive to conserve our resources and institutions. Past leaders made consumption of resources and abolition of institutions their priorities. Indeed many treated the country's resources like a common pool, over which they possessed ill-defined ownership, or should I say no political ownership. In fact, to our leaders with no exception whatsoever, killing the goose that laid the golden egg was always their goal.

Relevance of Federal System

The restructuring of our institutions in ways that will reduce the ability of our leaders and their governments to use power in unpredictable and arrogant ways is a duty that every citizen should advocate for to avoid our painful past of governance.

Under federalism, we are for participatory democracy. We believe that participation makes development demand-driven, bottom-up rather than top-down and supply-driven. We feel assured that federal government will greatly minimize waste of the country's scarce resources, since it will make people's voices heard, and their rights to participate in shaping their affairs respected. 

Furthermore, had we adopted a federal system after the union of South and North in July 1^st 1960, we would have never witnessed a rift between Mogadishu and Hargeisa and then to subsequent calls for unconditional divorce between the two zones. Besides, the unification of the two parts itself is not an option to blame, as many Somalilanders may believe, but rather to the unitary system enforced to run the new republic accordingly.

Puntland’s experience as a State

The final draft of the first constitution of Puntland written during the formation of PSS in 1998 declares explicitly that Puntland is part of Somalia but shall exercise a full autonomous authority until a federal constitution endorsed in a national referendum comes into place.

Since then Puntland was practicing itself as an autonomous state whereby most of governmental institutions are running in a normal manner and the region is enjoying a relative peace and stability.

The political process is undergoing a significant progress and since 1998, four administrations have rotated seats, one after the other, through voting of MPs despite the slow pace of improving the electoral system. In fact, the previous administrations have not done enough in shifting the system of representation inside the Parliament and in other institutions at regional and district levels as well from a clan-based deal to a fairer one man-one vote structure. For instance, regional governers are still getting their nominations through the issuance of presidential decrees rather than achieving it through direct voting from the constituents of districts they represent. Hopes are high for correcting of all those pitfalls in the current administration.

Despite such hindrances in Puntland political reform, people here prefer more to the current governing system than the previous unitary one because they already recognized the differences between the two and that the latter made their voices heard and respected than before. As a result, with all the basic services acquirable inside, locals no longer travel to a distant city in Somalia to merely attend a college, receive routine check-ups in a hospital there or worst of all for the purpose to obtain an individual passport as was the case in the past when all those services stashed in that location alone!

Currently there are over four universities in Puntland, as many as ten different colleges with different concentrations, over fifteen major hospitals, more than thirty-eight secondary schools etc. Private businesses are as well a booming sector that strived high and have trade connections through out the Arabian Gulf states and around the world.

Comparing above to what existed in Puntland before the end of Barre’s regime is strikingly alarming and unrivaled. That difference alone, which can result in any other region as well, could provide a persuading case for federal system to reign in the Third Republic of Somalia.