Opinion : Somalia’s Democratic Progress- The Effect of Neglecting Direct Elections on the Nation’s Development

Almost thirty-five years after the disintegration of Somalia's central government in 1991, the nation continues to be embroiled in a process frequently characterized as a "transitional" political phase. The nation has seen the rise and fall of governments, the drafting and revision of the constitution, and the steady provision of international assistance. yet, one essential democratic milestone remains deferred: the implementation of direct elections grounded in the principle of one person, one vote. Somalia's failure to prioritize direct elections is not solely a technical or security concern; it represents a political decision that has significantly undermined democratic legitimacy, accountability, and political trust.

 A Chronicle of Disrupted Democracy

Somalia's contemporary democratic movement commenced with the military's overthrow of the elected civilian government through a coup d’état in 1969. The military regime governed the country for 21 years prior to its collapse in 1991, an event that resulted in the disintegration of the state and the emergence of a protracted civil conflict.

In the absence of functioning institutions, political authority shifted to clan elders, militia commanders, and warlords. Early reconciliation initiatives focused primarily on restoring stability through elite-driven power-sharing arrangements, rather than rebuilding a citizen-centered political system.

This approach laid the foundation for a political culture in which representation became a matter of negotiation rather than direct electoral choice. Instead of rebuilding democracy from the grassroots, Somalia adopted arrangements that prioritized stability among political elites over broad public participation. As a result, political elites became resistant to change, preferring to replicate familiar patterns of governance in the 4.5 clan system. This form of political behavior has persisted to the present day.

From the inception of the transitional National Government in 2000 until the conclusion of the Transitional Federal Government in 2012, Somalia predominantly depended on the indirect selection mechanism. The 4.5 clan power-sharing formula established clan identity as the main basis for political representation, which marginalized individual citizenship. Despite initially being characterized as provisional measures, indirect elections gradually became fairly established. Each transition assured subsequent direct election; however, none were realized. Over time, the "temporary" mechanism became entrenched, effectively ending established political practices.

The Federal Period: Commitments Unfulfilled

The establishment of the Federal Government of Somalia in 2012 engendered optimism for a renewal of democratic governance. Successive governments have publicly pledged to conduct direct elections, notably in 2016 and 2021. However, the federal and regional authorities consistently postponed these commitments, citing concern over insecurity, logistical difficulties, and political disagreements. Although these challenges are genuine, they have progressively become mere reasons rather than insurmountable obstacles.

The absence of persistent political commitment has been more influential than technical constraints. Elite interests and apprehension about electoral participation hindered progress. one of the primary reasons why direct elections continue to be elusive is that indirect systems favor political elites. Clan power brokers, incumbent officials, regional leaders, and established interests continue to exert influence through negotiated selection procedures. Direct elections would undermine these arrangements by transferring authority to the general populace. A truly competitive electoral process necessitates accountability, effective policy implementation, and active participation components that many actors within the current political framework are hesitant to adopt.

Consequently, democratic reform is frequently addressed in rhetoric but is often avoided in practical implementation. The expense of postponing democracy and the extended lack of direct elections has incurred significant consequences. Public trust in political institutions continues to decline, particularly among young Somalis, who  constitute the majority of the population. Political engagement appears remote and unsustainable, fostering indifference and discontent. Furthermore, governments established through an indirect approach often face challenges to their legitimacy, thereby undermining their capacity to govern efficiently, resolve disputes, and foster national unity. The absence of a robust domestic democratic mandate further compounds Somalia's ongoing reliance on external actors.

Security versus democracy: An Illusory Dilemma

Somalia's leaders frequently contended that security should take precedence over democracy. Nevertheless, this formulation offers a misleading dichotomy. Inclusive political participation has the potential to enhance security through the promotion of legitimacy and the development of cooperative relationships between citizens and the state. Localizing electoral processes and civic participation initiatives has already proven that democratic procedures are viable even in vulnerable environments. Delaying democracy until we achieve "ideal conditions" could lead to its indefinite implementation.