Clan politics undermine Somalia’s push to finalize constitution, report finds
Source: Hiiraan Onlne, Tuesday April 8, 2025
Clan elders and local officials gather informally to negotiate the formation of district councils. (Digital illustration/HOL)
Mogadishu (HOL) — Somalia’s efforts to finalize its Provisional Constitution are at risk of stalling due to the enduring dominance of clan-based governance and the lack of trust in formal state institutions, according to a new report released this week by International IDEA.
The study, which examines local governance in Galmudug and Hirshabelle—two of Somalia’s most fragile federal member states—reveals that clan elders, customary law, and informal power-sharing pacts continue to exert more influence than national or federal laws in shaping political order at the local level. Despite formal frameworks meant to standardize local government, the reality on the ground is dominated by clan negotiations and ad hoc agreements.
“Customary law and clan-based politics largely determine how governance functions at the local level,” wrote authors Winluck Wahiu and Adem Kassie Abebe. “Formal legal frameworks have not taken root in many parts of the country.”
The findings come as political tensions between Somalia’s federal government and its member states are stressed. In March, the federal parliament passed amendments to adopt a presidential system of governance. Puntland, one of Somalia’s more stable regions, rejected the move and cut ties with Mogadishu, accusing the federal government of unilateralism.
While national leaders promote federalism and constitutional reform, the report shows these efforts are being undermined by fragmented local power dynamics. In Galmudug, district councils are often formed through clan-based negotiations rather than elections. District boundaries have been redrawn in ways that reflect local political deals rather than legal or administrative criteria—raising concerns about representation manipulation ahead of future national elections.
Hirshabelle, established in 2016, has faced even deeper governance challenges. Clan disputes, armed groups, and limited resources have paralyzed the state. The majority of its districts either operate independently of the state government or fall under Al Shabaab’s control. Although the state passed a local government law in 2018 to revive district councils, few have been implemented effectively.
The report also highlights how the federal government and federal member state officials frequently bypass legal norms to manipulate the selection of district officials, often using traditional leaders as gatekeepers. In return, clan elders seek to secure public positions for their communities, creating a cycle of transactional politics and weak institutions.
“State and federal officials intervene in local governance not to build institutions, but to secure alliances,” the report found. “This undermines the independence and credibility of local councils.”
Somalia adopted its Provisional Constitution in 2012 following more than a decade of negotiation. Intended as a transitional document, the constitution was never ratified through a national referendum and remains incomplete. Although the National Consultative Council—a body composed of federal and regional leaders—has agreed on key issues such as power-sharing and security models, progress on finalizing the constitution has been slow and politically contested.
Somalia’s governance system officially includes two levels: the federal government and federal member states. Local governments are meant to fall under the jurisdiction of FMS authorities. However, the 2013 Local Government Law and later federal frameworks like the Wadajir Plan have attempted to create uniform guidelines for district governance, including taxation, council formation, and service delivery.
The report reveals that these frameworks have been inconsistently implemented. In practice, clan leaders, sharia courts, and community-based power-sharing deals remain the primary vehicles for conflict resolution, resource allocation, and political appointments in most rural and semi-urban areas.
In both Galmudug and Hirshabelle, newly created districts often lack clear boundaries or administrative capacity. Instead of being elected, local councils are appointed by clan elders or state ministries based on informal quotas. This process frequently sparks disputes over representation and power, delaying governance and weakening public trust.
“These clan-based settlements offer flexibility but also breed instability,” the authors wrote. “Without a strong legal foundation and broader civic inclusion, local councils remain vulnerable to elite manipulation.”
The report recommends that Somali authorities engage more deeply with traditional governance systems rather than attempting to replace them outright. It calls for a bottom-up approach to constitutional reform that recognizes the resilience of customary and religious authorities while expanding access to services and accountability mechanisms.
The authors also urge greater inclusion of women and youth in local governance and stress the need for clearer revenue-sharing arrangements between federal and regional governments. At present, many district administrations lack the funds or legal clarity to operate effectively.
Somalia has made notable progress in the past two decades, including the formation of five federal member states and a federal parliament. However, the report warns that unless the constitution-building process addresses the realities of sub-state governance, the country risks deepening its political fragmentation.
“Somalia’s constitution must be built not just in Mogadishu, but in the districts and villages where governance is lived,” the report concludes.