Mogadishu, September 8, 2024 – Sheikh Adan Mohamed Nur Madobe, the Speaker of Somalia’s House of the People, has enacted a sweeping ban on press conferences both within and around the parliamentary premises. This decision, unveiled last Friday, has ignited discussions surrounding the openness and accessibility of the media in Somalia.

The announcement comes on the heels of heightened political strife, particularly after a recent press conference where MPs from the South West region expressed their endorsement of Ethiopian military presence in Bakool. This stance has drawn ire and sparked significant debate within the chambers, further polarizing lawmakers along lines of those advocating for Ethiopian forces and those demanding their departure.

As a result, momentum is building for a motion to strip 25 MPs of their parliamentary immunity, accused of abetting such protests. Around 40 colleagues have rallied in support of this motion, asserting that backing foreign troops destabilizes Somalia’s sovereignty.

Although Madobe has not articulated a specific rationale behind the prohibitive measure, the timing is telling, as it closely follows the contentious press conference. While the directive hints at the possibility of holding press events outside official parliamentary grounds, it remains unclear if such gatherings would encounter additional restrictions.

This sweeping ban poses significant challenges for independent media organizations that routinely cover parliamentary discussions. Opposition voices, which often utilize press conferences to critique government actions, will also bear the brunt of these constraints. This situation raises profound concerns about the viability of political transparency and genuine discourse in Somalia moving forward.

In light of the new restrictions, several MPs have turned to social media platforms as an avenue for expression. Many have found solace in Twitter, Facebook, and other channels to amplify their perspectives. Analysts note that while these digital platforms offer an alternative, they lack the immediacy and direct engagement that in-person conferences provide, which typically allow journalists to pose probing questions.