Tuesday, June 17, 2025
- Advertisement -
By H.E. Hassan Moalim Mohamud – Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs
The launch of Somalia’s National Dialogue on June 16 marked a significant and much-anticipated stride towards breaking free from years of political impasse in our nation. Though the event was neither flawless nor exhaustive, it represented a genuine attempt to foster national consensus—a feat long overdue. However, it’s hard to ignore the irony when opposition figures criticize the process, particularly when they deliberately chose not to attend. This raises a question: how can one sensibly argue exclusion when they willingly opt out?
It is crucial to clarify one key point: the President extended a heartfelt invitation to all political actors, including former leaders, opposition figures, civil society representatives, Islamic scholars, and registered political parties. There were no selections made; every voice had a seat at the table. The sole exclusion was their own—an absence that certainly tarnishes any claims of marginalization. To complain about exclusion while abstaining from engagement is not only intellectually dishonest but also politically naïve. This concerns not a one-sided dialogue but a choice by certain individuals to linger on the sidelines, opting to complain rather than contribute.
Critics argue that the dialogue was overwhelmed by supporters of the government. However, is it fair to request representation when they have rejected opportunities to represent themselves? The very same individuals accusing the President of dominating the discourse were offered platforms, complete with microphones and national exposure. Yet, they chose not to participate. This is not a matter of being marginalized; it is a clear stance of political indecision. Leadership entails stepping up, especially in challenging times—it’s about more than social media posts or vague press statements. It’s about genuinely engaging with the issues that matter to our nation.
Some politicians have described the “One Person, One Vote” principle as a “deception,” which is strikingly ironic coming from those who have yet to propose a viable alternative. The current legal framework in Somalia is undergoing necessary reforms precisely because indirect elections are no longer sustainable. The proposed phased transition to universal suffrage is not an illusion but a hopeful avenue toward progress after years of stagnation. Sure, significant challenges remain, but to reject the journey merely because the first step isn’t perfect strikes me as counterproductive. The opposition professes support for electoral reform, yet they seem to reject every feasible approach to realizing it. After all, one cannot campaign against indirect elections while simultaneously boycotting the mechanism intended to replace them.
When it comes to finalizing the constitution, discussions have been lively and transparent in parliamentary chambers, with live-streaming, media accessibility, and documented proposals as part of this vital dialogue. Those raising concerns about specific articles, like Articles 69, 89, or 90, were invited to challenge these points openly on record in parliament. Yet, they continued to voice their objections from afar. This isn’t principled opposition; it feels more like political theater.
Let’s move beyond the illusion of moral superiority. There is no monopoly on opposition, nor is there an entitlement to operate without facing scrutiny. Real opposition should be about presenting alternatives instead of simply launching accusations. Somalia deserves leadership that’s constructive, not obstructive—leaders who engage actively in the monumental task of nation-building rather than whining from the sidelines.
In politics, you cannot ask for dialogue while simultaneously rejecting every chance to engage. You cannot claim to defend democracy while turning your back on its most fundamental tenet: participation. Remember, there was a time in Somalia when political actors begged for an opportunity to be heard, often at great personal risk. Today, the dynamic has shifted: a national consultation platform has been laid out, actively seeking those who might disagree and urging them to voice their opinions, not only with us but also with their constituents.
To those who attended and those who chose not to, a message: the door to dialogue and consensus remains open. History does not pause for those who shrink from opportunities for engagement. If you exchange presence for protest and substance for sulking, don’t expect to leave a legacy; rather, prepare for the possibility of irrelevance.
____________________________________
H.E. Hassan Moalim Mohamud – Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs of the Somali Federal Government.
Edited By Ali Musa
Axadle Times International – Monitoring.
