Tallaabooyinka Madaxweyne Xasan Sheekh Maxamuud waxay keeni karaan kharash siyaasadeed sare

Somalia’s political crossroads: constitutional overhaul, airspace disputes and a shrinking clock

MOGADISHU, Somalia — Somalia’s fragile federal project is entering a decisive stretch where every move carries legal and political consequences. Pressure is mounting over a proposed constitutional overhaul, a breakdown in elite negotiations, an escalating dispute over control of airspace and airports, and enduring grievances about land governance in Mogadishu — all as the presidency faces a narrowing window to build consensus around the next phase of state-building and elections.

At the core is a simple test with far-reaching implications: can the federal government and federal member states, notably Puntland State and Jubbaland, find a workable pact that commands legitimacy at home and credibility abroad? The answer will determine whether reforms stick or stall, and whether the state navigates its current turbulence or compounds it.

Constitutional reform sits at the center of that test. In federal systems, durable charters are built on wide buy-in, especially from regions that constitute the federation’s foundation. Somalia’s draft constitution has long awaited completion; supporters of rapid changes argue the country needs clarity on power-sharing, judicial architecture and the electoral model. Yet any amendment process that sidesteps inclusive consultation with the federal member states risks court challenges, elite resistance and implementation gridlock. Without consent, text on paper rarely translates into practice — and contested rules can harden political divides instead of healing them.

Recent talks in Mogadishu showed what could have been a rare opening. Participants from Puntland State and Jubbaland signaled a willingness to make difficult compromises, according to stakeholders in those camps — a posture not often seen in Somalia’s quarrelsome political cycles. That window closed before yielding a binding roadmap, an outcome that heightens the cost of miscalculation for all sides. In a polarized environment, missed moments have compounding effects: mutual suspicion rises, zero-sum tactics return and the margin for error narrows as timelines compress.

Tensions over the management of Somali airspace and airports have sharpened the stakes. Airspace is a national asset governed by domestic law and international obligations under the Chicago Convention and rules set by the International Civil Aviation Organization. Using it as a lever in political disputes — whether to deny access, delay clearances or signal favor and disfavor — undermines trust in civil aviation and invites scrutiny from partners. Stakeholders from Jubbaland and Puntland State say aircraft carrying their delegations were turned back early this month, raising questions about equitable access and adherence to standard operating procedures. Separately, the reported prolonged closure of Doolow airport in Gedo — now approaching two years, according to regional officials — has strained commerce, humanitarian logistics and social connectivity in the area.

Even when asserted in the name of public order, measures that appear to target specific regions or political rivals can boomerang. Actions affecting lawmakers associated with Puntland State constituencies — such as obstructed travel — risk poisoning relations with legislative institutions that Somalia needs to function. Aviation decisions are technical by nature; politicizing them erodes safety culture, investment confidence and the neutrality of regulators who must be above the fray.

Land governance in Mogadishu adds another flashpoint. Urban land is emotionally and economically charged; disputes there can escalate faster than almost any other grievance. Managing public land and adjudicating claims require transparent rules, strong registries and impartial enforcement. Allegations of land grabbing — particularly involving public-interest parcels — ignite public anger and accumulate political liabilities for whoever is in office. Somalia’s leaders would be wise to strengthen due process, publish clear criteria for allocation and accelerate dispute resolution mechanisms to prevent grievances from metastasizing into broader instability.

All of this unfolds against a tight calendar. With limited time left in the current presidential term, decisions taken in coming weeks and months will carry disproportionate weight. The calculation is no longer just about tactical advantage. It is about legacy, unity and whether the state’s institutions are left stronger or weaker after the dust settles. A negotiated electoral framework, jointly owned by the federal government and member states, remains the essential piece. Without it, every other reform is vulnerable to reversal or outright rejection.

There is a credible path out of the current impasse. It rests on basic, actionable steps that prioritize legality, predictability and inclusion:

• Convene an inclusive constitutional conference with binding terms of reference agreed by the federal government and all federal member states. Lock in a sequenced timetable and clear ratification thresholds before tackling content.
• Pause unilateral constitutional changes pending that conference. A short, defined moratorium can build goodwill and keep all parties at the table.
• Firewall civil aviation from political disputes. Publish transparent NOTAMs and procedures, invite third-party technical observers if needed, and ensure equal treatment of flights from all regions. Prioritize reopening critical airports — including Doolow — for humanitarian and commercial flows, subject to safety assessments.
• Affirm freedom of movement for political actors and lawmakers in line with the constitution and parliamentary rules. Political competition should occur in institutions, not in air corridors or at airport gates.
• Establish a temporary, independent land governance task force with civil society participation to audit disputed public land in Mogadishu, freeze questionable transfers and recommend remedies that can withstand judicial review.
• Agree on the contours and calendar of the next elections — model, sequencing and dispute resolution — and codify them through a consensus instrument endorsed by all federal member states.

None of this is easy. Somalia’s leaders face real security risks, limited bandwidth and the weight of history. But the underlying principles are straightforward: rules before rulers, institutions above personalities and equal treatment across regions as the bedrock of federal legitimacy. The political costs of unilateralism will almost certainly exceed any short-term gains — especially when the governing coalition is already stretched and the international community is watching the integrity of reforms closely.

There is still time to reset. A renewed commitment to consultation with Puntland State and Jubbaland, depoliticized management of airspace and land, and a credible, jointly owned electoral roadmap would signal a government confident in both its authority and its obligations. That path would not only reduce the risk of legal and political blowback; it would also strengthen Somalia’s claim to a more stable, rules-based future.

History will remember whether this moment was used to consolidate trust or to deplete it. The choice — and the legacy — are being written now.

By Ali Musa
Axadle Times international–Monitoring.