Somalia Provisional Constitution: Discussions of Politics, Religion, and Women
By. Ibrahim Sultan
First Published on April 29, 2021
In August 2012,
Somali delegations in the capital, Mogadishu, overwhelmingly approved the
country’s third constitution since its independence in 1960. The atmosphere at
the time was festive and full of hope, looking forward to peace for a country
that has suffered so much hardship. Today, after more than eight years, Somali
leaders still have not agreed on the completion of clauses and the date of the
popular referendum for the 143-article constitution. Critics describe this
stagnation as resulting from the immaturity of Somali politicians and
political turmoil, including the controversial decision to extend President
Farmajo’s mandate by two years.
Despite the
slowdown in the political process around the constitution, public discussions
are still ongoing. In a January 2017 poll of 1,422 Somalis
over the age of 18, 95% answered that they were aware of the new constitution.
The debate is split between politicians: liberal, open-minded, and more focused
on constitutional issues related to power, influence, and wealth sharing; and
the general public: closer to the conservatives and more focused on issues of
religion and women.
On the political
dimension and the reasons for not completing the articles of the constitution,
legal expert Mohamud Abdi, who lives in Mogadishu and whom I interviewed over
the phone, suggests, “The dialogue with Somaliland has stopped because it is
still officially part of Somalia and the constitution should address its
interests and concerns.” A second reason, he says, is “The power struggle
between the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) and Federal Member States (FMS)
and the lack of agreement on wealth sharing formulas, which has been postponed
under the constitution to be solved later.” However, in my opinion, the
underlying cause is worse than that: it is the failure of society to hold
politicians and lawmakers accountable, not to mention the absence of checks and
balances among government branches.
As for the issue of
the political role of women, the source of the controversy is that the
provisional constitution gives women equal rights in most areas, except for
matters of inheritance, which are determined by Islamic law. Most of the
discussion centers on constitution articles confirming women’s membership in
government branches and committees. A bill approved by Somalia’s lower house in
June of last year stipulates a specific quota for women in parliament, which is
30% of its members. It is a quota that has not yet been attained in full: for
instance, as of the last parliamentary elections, through the federal-state
legislators, female members were at 24%.
Nevertheless,
conservatives believe that the principle of the female quota has cultural and
political implications, including women’s ability to pass their agendas if they
can obtain another 30% of the votes of men. Conservatives also challenge why
the quota of men in parliament is not regulated to 70% so that they are not
marginalized in the future. In response, Sundus, a third-year university
student whom I interviewed on campus in Galkayo, says that “These are flimsy
arguments and are based on an ideological structure that considers women as
receptors and refuses to consider them as participating and active members of
society. The denial of women’s political rights gradually ends with the denial
of all their rights, because human rights are indivisible.” The question is
which one is more expensive for society: women’s participation or lack thereof?
And from a moral point of view, is it fair to silence half of Somalis? Where
will Somali women express their opinions and defend their rights if not in the
field of politics?
Another ongoing
debate is about Islam versus the Constitution. Somalia is a Muslim country that
wants to combine religion and modernity. Although the Somali provisional
constitution includes what are academically known as Sharia Guarantee Clauses
or SGCs, some clerics are still skeptical about the entire constitutional
process. Sheik M, a lecturer of Islamic studies at a local university in
Galkayo, who preferred not to mention his name, approached me with this
question: “Why is the constitution needed if Islam is itself a constitution?”
The same question
is often repeated in many Islamic countries. Muslim constitutional experts
usually answer that the idea of a constitution does not contradict Islam, as
the articles of the constitution are technically based on an Islamic rule known
to Muslim scholars, which is “to bring good and ward off evil whenever
possible,” and are dependent on each society, its era and its conditions.
However, in Sheikh M’s opinion, “The articles of the constitution which are
stipulating that Islam is the religion of the state and that everything that
violates the Sharia becomes null and void, are actually nothing but deceptive
matters aimed at attracting people and then pushing other agendas.” Although
the sheik has not given examples of the alleged deception, this idea still
arouses enthusiasm for some. But the clerics were among the delegates that
approved the constitution. Why did they approve it if they doubt it today?
Rather than rejecting the entire constitution, would it not be more useful to
present their concerns through legal means?
The bottom line is
that there is a need for national leadership by all stakeholders to pull the
country out of instability and complete the constitution. Continuation of a
constructive dialogue with Somaliland is necessary to ensure unity and
reactivate the constitution’s progress, as well as to promote civic culture and
the active participation of community members.
إرسال تعليق