Somalia’s fragile human-rights transition meets a test on press freedom
GENEVA — In a packed room at the United Nations Human Rights Council, Somali and British officials yesterday set out an upbeat case that Somalia is inching toward stronger national institutions. But the event’s most urgent testimony came from civil society: a warning that progress on paper is being undermined by a resurgent and more sophisticated campaign to silence journalists.
- Advertisement -
The UK and Somalia jointly hosted the side event during the council’s 60th session under the banner “Somalia’s Human Rights Transition: From Country-Specific Mandate to Strengthened National Institutions and International Human Rights Mechanism.” Somali ministers and the UK’s ambassador for human rights framed the transition as a work in progress — citing the creation of an independent National Human Rights Commission, new policies, and a transitional roadmap. Yet for many in the room, those milestones cannot mask a harsh reality on the ground.
“Repression is evolving and expanding”
Omar Faruk Osman, secretary-general of the National Union of Somali Journalists (NUSOJ), was blunt. “The killing of journalists may have declined, but repression is evolving and expanding,” he told delegates. He described a landscape where “intimidation, arbitrary arrests, beatings, media bans, censorship, threats and both online and offline harassment against women journalists are now widespread and escalating across the country.”
Osman’s account reflected a pattern familiar to press-freedom monitors from Kabul to Kinshasa: the shift from headline-grabbing murders to legal harassment, digital attacks and procedural chicanery that slowly strangles independent reporting. Somalia’s past decade, marked by insurgency, clan politics and a fragile federal experiment, has given rise to laws and practices that criminalise dissent and leave little breathing room for critical journalism.
Old laws, new tactics
Panelists pointed to the legal architecture that critics say perpetuates repression. The 1964 Penal Code — a colonial-era relic in many respects — sits alongside a revised 2020 Media Law and sweeping Anti-Terrorism legislation. Together, they are used to summon journalists before courts and to justify censorship, even when official rhetoric embraces reform.
“Journalists continue to be dragged before courts under draconian provisions designed to silence dissent,” Osman warned. “As long as these laws remain in force, media freedom will remain under attack and civic space under siege.”
Those dynamics are compounded by impunity. Osman noted that, despite persistent reporting and repeated alerts to the UN Human Rights Council, “those responsible for the murders of journalists over the past 15 years have escaped punishment.” Without accountability, legal reforms risk becoming cosmetic.
Why the international gaze still matters
Somalia’s bid to transition its human-rights oversight from an international mandate to national institutions is, in theory, a sign of maturation. Donors and partners frequently urge countries to take ownership of human-rights protection. Yet for fragile states, that transfer must be credible — built on real protections and access.
Osman urged Abuja to expedite what he called “domestication” of international human-rights conventions and to extend a standing invitation to UN special procedures. He singled out three special rapporteurs — on freedom of expression, on human rights defenders, and on freedom of association — asking that they be allowed to visit and assess the situation first-hand. Those visits, advocates argue, are a pressure valve: they document violations, make recommendations and shine a spotlight on abuse.
Somalia’s struggle in a global context
The concerns voiced in Geneva are not unique to Somalia. Around the world, governments facing insecurity or political challenge are tilting toward a familiar playbook: use broadly drafted anti-terror laws and media regulations to control information, while deploying digital surveillance, online harassment and courtroom theatre to intimidate critics.
Women journalists bear a disproportionate share of the new tactics. Globally, female reporters confront coordinated online campaigns that spill into threats offline — a tactic that chills reporting and narrows civic space. In Somalia, where social conservatism, clan dynamics and conflict interact, the impact can be particularly severe.
Western governments, donors and multilateral institutions face a perennial dilemma: how to support state-building in fragile contexts while pressing for real protections for civic freedoms. The United Kingdom, which co-hosted the Geneva panel, has been a consistent voice on Somalia at global forums. But the leverage of diplomacies and aid comes with practical limits — and with the risk that pushing too hard without local buy-in will backfire.
What would meaningful reform look like?
- Legal reform that narrows the scope of vaguely worded anti-terror and media statutes and removes criminal penalties for journalism;
- Concrete accountability measures for past attacks on journalists, including transparent investigations and prosecutions;
- Mechanisms to protect women journalists from online and offline harassment, including digital-safety training and enforceable sanctions against abusers;
- A genuine invitation and cooperation with UN special procedures, with timelines and public follow-up on recommendations.
These steps would not be revolutionary in themselves; they are the basic architecture of the civic space many democracies take for granted. But in a country emerging from prolonged conflict, each reform requires political will, resources, and the political capital to overcome entrenched interests.
Questions that remain
As Somalia seeks to rebalance international oversight with national responsibility, policymakers must answer hard questions: Can reforms be insulated from the centrifugal pressures of clan politics and security expediency? Who will ensure that national institutions themselves remain independent and well-resourced? And if the international community loosens its direct scrutiny, what guarantees will there be that gains will not be reversed?
Omar Osman’s final admonition to the Geneva gathering was both a plea and a promise: “When progress is made, we will commend it. We will not remain silent when violations persist and abuses occur. We will raise our voice, call it out and demand accountability.” Those words encapsulate the compact at the heart of any human-rights transition — one that will be tested not in Geneva, but in Mogadishu’s courts, in newsroom offices, and in the online spaces where Somalia’s public life increasingly plays out.
By Ali Musa
Axadle Times international–Monitoring.
