Understanding Somaliland’s political system

Somaliland’s political system creatively blends organic and traditional Somali institutions and customs with those of the modern state. This has helped share power and keep the peace, but it may be time to consider change.  

Since declaring independence from Somalia in 1991, Somaliland has developed a distinctive system of governance that blends modern state institutions with traditional clan structures. This dual governance reality permeates every aspect of Somaliland’s political, social, and economic life, creating a complex system that defies simple categorisation and challenges conventional notions of statehood and democracy. At the heart of Somaliland’s governance structure lies its constitution, ratified in 2001, which establishes a presidential system of government with a bicameral legislature. 

This modern state apparatus operates alongside, and often in conjunction with, the traditional clan system that has governed Somali society for centuries. It still retains legitimacy in the eyes of much of the public and so the state has coopted and integrated those institutions. The result is a hybrid system that attempts to balance the demands of modern statehood with the deeply ingrained cultural practices and social structures of Somaliland’s society. This dual governance system has provided a framework for resolving conflicts, distributing resources, and fostering a sense of national identity while respecting traditional social structures. However, it also presents unique challenges, particularly in terms of standardising governance practices, ensuring equitable representation, and navigating the sometimes-conflicting demands of clan interests and national priorities. 

The interplay between modern state structures and traditional clan systems is evident in virtually every aspect of governance in Somaliland. The three political parties – Kulmiye, Waddani and UCID – while ostensibly national entities, often align closely with clan interests. This is an old problem in Somali politics and similar issues emerged during the turbulent 1960s in the unified Somali republic when parties represented clans rather than classes or ideas. The formation of governments, from the presidential level down to local administrations, involves careful balancing of clan representation to ensure broad-based support and stability. Even the allocation of development projects and resources often follows clan-based calculations alongside considerations of national interest. 

The executive branch 

The executive branch of Somaliland’s government is structured according to modern democratic principles but operates within the context of traditional clan dynamics. At its head is the president, who is directly elected by the people for a five-year term, with the possibility of one re-election, as Muse Bihi is currently seeking. Other than Dahir Riyale Kahin, who initially came to power following the untimely death of Muhammad Egal and was then given a mandate to continue a year later, an incumbent has never been reelected in Somaliland. The president serves as both head of state and head of government, wielding significant executive power. 

The president appoints the cabinet responsible for implementing government policies and managing various state departments. These appointments, while ostensibly based on merit and political considerations, also reflect the need to balance clan interests. The president must carefully consider clan representation when forming the cabinet to ensure broad support for the government and to maintain political stability. One of the key challenges facing the executive branch is balancing the need for efficient, merit-based governance with the expectations of clan-based patronage. 

While there have been efforts to professionalise the civil service and implement modern management practices, such as those attempted by the World Bank, these initiatives often face resistance rooted in traditional clan loyalties and expectations. As a result, the executive branch often operates as a hybrid system, incorporating elements of both modern bureaucracy and traditional networks of influence and obligation. 

The president’s role extends beyond formal governmental functions to include that of a national mediator and consensus-builder. In times of political crisis or inter-clan conflict, the president is often called upon to negotiate solutions that satisfy both modern legal requirements and traditional expectations. This dual role reflects the broader reality of governance in Somaliland, where formal state authority is continually negotiated and balanced against traditional sources of legitimacy and power. 

Legislative branch 

Somaliland’s legislative branch epitomises the country’s dual governance system, with its unique bicameral structure that incorporates both modern democratic representation and traditional clan leadership. The legislature consists of two houses: the House of Representatives (wakiilo) and the House of Elders (guurti). 

The House of Representatives, the lower house, comprises 82 members elected through universal suffrage for five-year terms. This chamber represents the modern democratic ideal of popular representation within a clan-based process. Members are elected from political parties, and the composition of the house is meant to reflect the will of the electorate. The House of Representatives is responsible for initiating and passing legislation, approving the national budget, and holding the executive branch accountable through various oversight mechanisms. 

On the other side, the House of Elders, or Guurti, also consists of 82 members selected through traditional clan mechanisms. This upper house represents the integration of traditional governance structures into the modern state apparatus. Members of the Guurti are respected clan elders who bring centuries of customary law and conflict-resolution experience to the legislative process. The Guurti plays a crucial role in maintaining peace and stability, often mediating conflicts that the formal state institutions struggle to resolve. It also has the power to review legislation passed by the House of Representatives, particularly in matters relating to religion, culture, society, elections, the constitution, national security, and national interest. You might liken it to the UK House of Lords providing general guidance and expertise to the elected body. 

Somaliland’s bicameral structure creates a unique legislative process that blends modern law-making with traditional consensus-building. Bills typically originate in the House of Representatives but must also gain approval from the Guurti before being sent to the president for assent. 

This process ensures that new laws are scrutinised from both modern democratic and traditional cultural perspectives, theoretically resulting in legislation that is both progressive and culturally appropriate. The legislative branch also reflects broader clan dynamics in Somaliland society. 

The distribution of seats in both houses is carefully balanced to ensure the representation of major clan families, sometimes at the expense of strict proportional representation based on population. This clan-based balancing act extends to the legislative agenda and voting patterns. Members of parliament often find themselves navigating between national interests and clan expectations, particularly on issues related to resource allocation or power-sharing. This can sometimes lead to legislative gridlock or decisions that prioritise clan harmony over national development priorities. 

Judiciary 

The judiciary in Somaliland operates a regime of legal pluralism, where formal state courts coexist and interact with traditional dispute resolution mechanisms. This dual system reflects the broader governance reality in Somaliland, attempting to bridge the gap between modern legal principles and customary law. At the apex of the formal judicial system is the Supreme Court, followed by regional appeals courts, regional courts, and district courts. This structure mirrors many western legal systems and is designed to provide a standardised, rule-of-law-based approach to justice. The formal courts are tasked with interpreting the constitution, adjudicating civil and criminal cases, and serving as a check on executive and legislative power. However, parallel to this formal system is a network of traditional dispute resolution mechanisms based on customary law, known as xeer. 

Xeer is a set of unwritten conventions and procedures that have governed Somali society for centuries. It is administered by clan elders and focuses on restorative justice, compensation, and maintaining social harmony. Many Somalilanders, particularly in rural areas, prefer to resolve disputes through these traditional mechanisms rather than the formal court system. The coexistence of these two systems creates a unique legal landscape. Minor disputes, particularly those involving family or clan matters, are often resolved through Xeer. More serious criminal cases or those involving parties from different clans may be referred to the formal court system. However, the boundaries between these systems are often fluid, with cases moving between formal and traditional forums depending on the nature of the dispute and the preferences of the parties involved. 

This dual system presents both advantages and challenges. On the positive side, it provides flexibility in addressing different types of conflicts and allows for culturally appropriate resolutions. The traditional system is often seen as more accessible, faster, and more aligned with local cultural norms. It has played a crucial role in maintaining social stability, particularly in areas where the reach of formal state institutions is limited. However, the dual system also creates challenges in terms of standardising legal practices and ensuring equal protection under the law. The outcomes of traditional dispute resolution can vary depending on the clan affiliations of the parties involved, potentially leading to inconsistencies in justice. There are also concerns about the protection of individual rights, particularly for women and minorities, within the traditional system. 

The formal judiciary faces its own set of challenges. Under-resourcing, a lack of trained personnel, and allegations of corruption have undermined public confidence in the state courts. Moreover, judges in the formal system often find themselves navigating between state law and customary law, sometimes incorporating elements of xeer into their rulings to ensure that decisions are culturally acceptable and enforceable. 

The judiciary’s role in Somaliland’s governance system extends beyond dispute resolution. The Supreme Court plays a crucial role in constitutional interpretation and in adjudicating disputes between different branches of government. However, its ability to serve as an effective check on executive and legislative power is sometimes limited by political pressures and the influence of clan dynamics. 

Local government 

Local government in Somaliland similarly operates at the intersection of formal state structures and traditional clan-based governance. The local government system is organised into regions, districts, and local municipalities, each with its administrative structures. However, the effectiveness and legitimacy of these formal structures often depend on their ability to work in harmony with traditional clan leadership. 

At the regional level, governors are appointed by the central government to oversee state administration. Districts are managed by district commissioners, while municipalities are led by mayors. In theory, these officials are part of a centralised bureaucratic system, responsible for implementing national policies and managing local affairs. However, in practice, their authority is often shared with, or contingent upon the support of, local clan elders and traditional leaders. 

The influence of the clan system is particularly pronounced at the local level, with local councillors often chosen by clan elders. Clan elders play a significant role in local decision-making, often serving as informal advisors to government officials or acting as intermediaries between the community and state institutions. In many cases, important local decisions require the consensus of both formal government structures and traditional clan leadership. 

This dual system of local governance presents both opportunities and challenges. On the positive side, it allows for a degree of local autonomy and ensures that governance remains connected to community needs and cultural norms. The involvement of clan elders can enhance the legitimacy of local government actions and help mobilise community support for development initiatives. 

However, the system also creates complexities in terms of accountability and standardisation of governance practices. The balance of power between formal local government officials and traditional leaders can vary significantly from one area to another, leading to inconsistencies in policy implementation and service delivery. There are also concerns about the representativeness of this system, particularly in urban areas where clan affiliations may be less pronounced or where significant minority populations exist.  

Resource allocation at the local level often reflects this dual governance reality. While formal budgeting processes exist, the actual distribution of resources frequently involves negotiations with clan leaders to ensure equitable allocation among different communities. This can help gain local support for development projects but may sometimes lead to inefficiencies or decisions that prioritise clan balance over technical or economic considerations. 

The interaction between formal local government structures and traditional governance systems is particularly evident in conflict resolution and the maintenance of local security. While police and formal courts exist, many local disputes are still resolved through traditional mechanisms mediated by clan elders. Local government officials often work in tandem with these traditional structures to maintain peace and order. 

The development of local democracy in Somaliland has been gradual. While municipal councils are elected, the process often reflects clan-based calculations alongside individual merit. 

Electoral process 

While elections are conducted through universal suffrage, with citizens casting votes for individual candidates or parties, the entire electoral process—from candidate selection to campaigning and voting—is heavily influenced by clan considerations. 

The National Electoral Commission (NEC) oversees the electoral process, managing voter registration, polling stations, and result tabulation. This modern institution operates according to international standards of electoral management. However, its work is conducted in a context where clan dynamics significantly shape electoral outcomes. 

Political parties in Somaliland, while ostensibly national organisations with broad platforms, often align closely with clan interests. The constitution limits the number of official parties to three, a measure intended to prevent the proliferation of clan-based parties. This has allowed Hargeisa to avert the risk of becoming what historian Mohamed Isa Trunji has called a “clanocracy”. Nevertheless, these parties still tend to draw their core support from specific clan groups or alliances. The nomination process for candidates exemplifies the dual nature of Somaliland's electoral system. 

Although parties have formal procedures for selecting candidates, these selections often involve complex negotiations to ensure representation across different clan lines. This practice, known as clan calculus, aims to create balanced tickets that can attract support from multiple clan groups. Campaigning similarly reflects this duality. Candidates employ modern campaign tactics, holding rallies, using media, and presenting policy platforms. However, they also rely heavily on clan networks to mobilise voters and build support. Clan elders frequently play a crucial role in endorsing candidates and encouraging their communities to vote in particular ways. 

The actual voting process adheres to democratic norms, with secret ballots and monitored polling stations. However, voting patterns frequently reflect clan affiliations, with certain regions or districts voting overwhelmingly for candidates associated with the dominant local clan. 

This clan-influenced electoral system has both positive and negative aspects. On the positive side, it has contributed to political stability by ensuring that all major clan groups feel represented in the political process. It has also helped to prevent the kind of violent electoral conflicts seen in many other African countries. 

The involvement of clan elders in the electoral process, particularly in voter mobilisation and dispute resolution, has lent traditional legitimacy to the modern democratic system. However, the system also presents significant challenges. The focus on clan balance can sometimes overshadow considerations of individual merit or policy positions, potentially leading to the election of less qualified candidates. It can also reinforce clan divisions, and the system has faced criticism for potentially disenfranchising minority groups or individuals who do not align strongly with clan structures, particularly in the diaspora. There are also concerns about the long-term sustainability of this model, as younger, more educated generations may seek a political system less dominated by clan considerations. 

Why it is time for change 

The dual governance reality in Somaliland presents a complex and multifaceted system that permeates every aspect of Somaliland’s political, economic, and social life. This unique blend of modern state institutions and traditional clan-based structures has been both a source of stability and a challenge for Somaliland’s development and quest for international recognition. Throughout the various branches mentioned, we see a consistent pattern of interaction between formal state mechanisms and traditional clan influences. This dual system has allowed Somaliland to maintain a degree of peace and stability that is remarkable in the context of the Horn of Africa, demonstrating the potential of indigenous governance solutions in post-conflict societies. 

However, the dual governance system also presents significant challenges. The need to balance clan interests can lead to inefficiencies in resource allocation, hinder the development of truly national institutions, and perpetuate inequalities between different clan groups. The system can sometimes prioritise clan representation over individual merit or national interest, potentially impeding Somaliland's long-term development goals. In the economic sphere, while clan networks provide important safety nets and facilitate resource mobilisation, they can also lead to uneven development and challenges in implementing national economic policies. The distribution of resources and opportunities often involves complex negotiations to maintain clan balance, which can sometimes override considerations of economic efficiency or social need. 

As Somaliland continues to develop, it faces the challenge of evolving its governance system to meet the changing needs and expectations of its population, particularly its youth. There is a growing demand for a political system that is less dominated by clan considerations and more focused on individual rights, meritocracy, and national development priorities. However, any reforms must be carefully balanced against the need to maintain the social and political stability that the current system, for all its flaws, has helped to ensure. 

The dual governance reality also challenges Somaliland's quest for international recognition. While integrating traditional structures has contributed to internal stability, it can be difficult for outside observers to understand or accept. International norms of statehood typically emphasise centralised authority and uniform application of law, which can be at odds with Somaliland's more complex and layered system of governance. Though this ambivalence has maintained peace it is time for us to be more ambitious.