Loading article content...
Loading article content...
MOGADISHU, 14 November 2026 Somalia's government on Saturday rejected criticism by United Nations human rights experts who condemned the dismissal of the country's chief justice, saying a Supreme Court ruling that the president's term had expired has no legal effect.
Two U.N. special rapporteurs, Margaret Satterthwaite and Ben Saul, said in a statement on Nov. 12 that the dismissal of Chief Justice Bashe Yusuf Ahmed by presidential decree on Nov. 4 was unlawful and called for him to be restored to office.
"We strongly condemn this blatant interference with the independence of the judiciary," the experts said. "The unilateral dismissal of the Chief Justice by Presidential decree did not follow constitutional procedures, including approval by Parliament or a proposal from the Judicial Services Commission."
The experts said the government had deployed hundreds of security personnel to the Supreme Court to "disrupt and intimidate the Court," and that seven Supreme Court judges had their personal security protection withdrawn and were banned from travelling. They called on security forces to "stand down."
The Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs said it took the concerns seriously and remained committed to judicial independence and the rule of law, but accused the experts of failing to seek the government's views first.
Related articles
"Regrettably, the experts did not seek clarification from the State before issuing their statement, as the Code of Conduct for Special Procedures Mandate-holders of the Human Rights Council requires," the ministry said.
It said Somalia's mission in Geneva had asked the experts for an official letter setting out the issues before an emergency meeting, but received none, and that the experts shared their press release only after it had been published.
The ministry said Bashe was removed through the same transitional process by which he was appointed, because the High Council of the Judiciary envisaged in the 2026 constitution has not yet been established. It said the decision was unconnected to the court's deliberations.
The government "does not recognise the pronouncements as a ruling of the Court," the ministry said, arguing that a ruling can be issued only by a lawfully constituted bench presided over by a sitting chief justice. It said it would pursue its position "through lawful and institutional means, without pressure on any judge."