INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose of the Report

This report combines findings of a desk study and a follow-up fieldwork. Its aim is to review Somaliland history and current status in order to identify causes and contributors to the escalation and de-escalation of conflict.

The desk study was carried out from September – November 2003. Bulhan wrote the desk study when he was the Executive Director of the Academy for Peace and Development – an organization he cofounded in 1999 and led from its inception to January 31, 2004. The contributors to the desk study included the staff of the Academy who in part drew from work they carried out in collaboration with WSP International.

The fieldwork was carried out from March – May 2004 by the staff of the Center for Creative Solutions. It used different methods of data collection including observations, key informant interviews, focus groups, and informal group discussions. The fieldwork was to reassess the desk study findings, the relevant key variables, and conclusions. In addition, the fieldwork was to amplify and deepen understanding of the current problems and future prospects of Somaliland.

1.2 The Center for Creative Solutions

This report is prepared by the Center for Creative Solutions based in Hargeisa Somaliland. The Center was established in 1995 and registered then as Center for Health and Development. The Center changed its original name for two reasons.

Firstly, the priorities of the Center expanded beyond its initial health agenda to wider policy and systemic concerns in post-conflict situations. Secondly, the Center builds on the observation that the mosaic of problems prevalent in post-conflict situation force people to worry about and get stuck with the pressing problems at hand, not on strategies and methods that solve these problems.

In short, the Center encourages its staff and associates to think creatively to contribute to political, economic, social, and technological solutions in post-conflict situation.

1.3 Selection of Focus Issue for Fieldwork

The desk study examined the status and development of Somaliland since 1991 using the CAF.1 The fieldwork was carried in order to:

- Validate or replace desk study information;
- Fill knowledge gaps on specific issues;
- Deepen knowledge (both information and views) on these issues; and
- Gauge views and concerns of informants from different groups;
- Identify solutions and offer recommendations for change.

Initially, twelve focus issues (out of the thirty CAF variables) were selected for further research through fieldwork in Somaliland because:

- They seemed salient problems in the political, social and economic history of Somaliland since 1991, following the collapse of the dictatorial regime;
- They appeared pertinent to the escalation or de-escalation of conflict in Somaliland;
- Some of them intensified or alleviated poverty in Somaliland.

1.4 Change in Focus Issues

In the middle of the fieldwork, we found the need to make changes in how we approach the study and write up the report. Following the CAF categories mechanically seemed counter-productive. Thus, we gave due attention to the particular concerns of field study participants. In the end, we reduced the twelve focus issues we initially selected to seven that seemed to us most critical for the escalation and deescalation of conflict in Somaliland. They are:

1. Clan Cleavages,
2. Inequity in Governance and Political Institutions,
3. Equity of Law and Judicial System,
4. Human Rights (with emphasis on Freedom of Speech and role of Civil society),
5. Economic Structure and Performance,
6. Environment and Natural Resources, and
7. External Factors (with emphasis on Regional Conflicts, and Role of Diaspora).

The chapters are organized along temporal and thematic divisions. Each chapter first presents why we chose the focus issues after which it presents the background and current status of the issue. Background discussion covers relevant information prior to 1991 and current status covers issues from 1991 to the present. Using 1991 as the temporal divide is justified by two critical developments – the collapse of the military regime and the reclamation of Somaliland independence. In addition, each chapter ends with highlight of potential escalators and de-escalators of conflict and with summary of the issues discussed.

The report is written by Hussein Abdilahi Bulhan who is most grateful to – Iise Uragte Hussein, Bashir Barre Buh, and Jama Osman Ashur. These research colleagues helped in gathering information during the fieldwork. We hope the report contributes to better understanding of Somaliland as it experiments with home-made solutions to its problems.

We hope this report is useful to the government and people of Somaliland as well as to international actors helping Somaliland to:

- Further develop its home-bred, low cost methods of peacemaking to solve armed conflicts;
- Ameliorate problems of poverty endemic to its past and still rampant in its post-conflict conditions;
- Promote the struggle toward democratic initiatives as shown by its local elections in 2002 and presidential election in 2003; and
- Ensure that those who seek to derail these achievements on peace and democracy by provoking instability within Somaliland, or by inciting armed conflict on its borders, do not succeed.

HIGHLIGHTS ON SOMALILAND

Area and Location

Comprising a total land mass of 137,600 km², the territory is bound by the Gulf of Eden to the north, the Republic of Djibouti on the northwest, the Federal Republic on the South and West, and Puntland (generally Somalia) on the East. It lies between latitude 8º and 11º 27’ north and longitude 42º 35’ and 49º east.2

Climate: Situated 78º north of the equator, Somaliland is a semi-arid with an average temperature range from 25º C to 35º C and the sun passes vertically overhead twice a year – on March 22nd and September 23rd.

Humidity: Somaliland’s humidity varies from 63% in the dry season to 82% in the wet season.

Topographic Zones

The country consists of three main zones – the Coastal Plain (Guban), the Coastal Range (Ogo), and the Plateau (Hawd). Mountains located in the center and the east rise to six and seven thousand feet. The Coastal Plain (Guban) has high temperature and low rainfall, with summer temperatures easily averaging over 100º F. People and livestock concentrate in this zone during the winter. The Coastal Range (Ogo), a high plateau to the south of Guban, has elevation ranging between 6,000 feet in the north and 3,000 feet in the south. Rainfall is heavier in this zone than in the Guban but varies significantly. The Plateau (Hawd), lying to the south of the Ogo, is heavily populated during the rainy season and used for grazing livestock.

It is estimated that only about 3% of the total land is cultivated, another 7% has potential for future agricultural development when rainfall, soil fertility and depth, and topography are considered.3

Rainfall

Average rainfall is 14.5 inches in much of the country. Humidity varies from 63% in the dry season to 82% in the rainy season. There are four seasons – Gu’ and Haga in the summer period and Jilal and Deyr in the winter seasons.

The Gu’ season, the first part of the summer and the period of heaviest rainfall in Ogo and Hawd, is generally in late March, April, and May. It is the period of fresh grazing and breeding of livestock. Jilal and Deyr, the dry season of scarcity, begin in October and continues until the end of March or early April. The Ogo and the Hawd in particular are extremely dry during this period, causing much hardship to people and livestock. There is some rainfall (called Hays) in the Guban and occurs January to March, or between December and January.

Population: The population of Somaliland is estimated to be 3 million of which approximately 55% are nomadic and 45% are urban or rural inhabitants.4

Density: The population density is estimated at 22 persons per km².

Vital Statistics

Population growth is 3.1%, calculated from average crude birth rate of 4.46% and crude death rate of 1.32%. Life expectancy at birth is between 45 and 50 years.

Religion: Islam

Language: Somali

State

By constitution, the state consists of an independent judiciary, a bi-chameral parliament (House of Elders and House of Representatives), and the executive led by the President, Vice President, and the cabinet.

Regions: Somaliland divides into six regions – namely, Awadal, Northwest, Sahil, Togdheer, Sanaag, and Sool.

Capital: Hargeisa

Main Port: Berbera

Currency: Somaliland Shilling

CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS IN SOMALILAND

1991- 2003

26/1/1991 President Mohamed Siyaad Barre and his forces fled Mogadishu and the Somali State totally collapsed.
29/1 - 2/2/1991 The Somali National Movement (SNM)5 captured the Northern Regions of former Somali Democratic Republic
4/2 -6/2/1991 The SNM attacked Borama, aiming to capture government installations but resulting in killing of some civilians in the process.
15/2-27/2/1991 SNM and traditional elders convened in Berbera for the first reconciliation conference called “Shirka Walaalaynta Beelaha Waqooye” (Rebuilding Brotherhood of Northern Clans). This conference paved the way the subsequent Bur’o Conference.
27/4-18/5/1991 The conference known as Shirweynaha Beelaha Woqooyi (The Grand Conference of Northern Clans) was held in parallel with a meeting with the SNM Central Committee.
18/5/1991 The Bur’o Conference concluded with a restoration of independence and sovereignty for the former Somaliland British Protectorate. The conferees announced a transitional administration, led by Abdirahman Ahmed Ali (Tuur), to govern the territory for a two-year period.
11/1/1992 Clashes between Habar-Yonis and Habar-Je’lo broke out in Bur’o. Among the triggers of this conflict was the Tuur Administration’s attempt to disarm clan militia and form a national military force.
October 1992: Fighting broke out in Berbera, after a government-supported militia moved into the city and provoked armed clan opposition. The fighting continued sporadically for over six months. In October 1992, opposition clan militia expelled the pro-government militia.
28/10/1992 The conflict was brought to an end at Sheikh Conference called “Tawfiiq Conference”. This conference also concluded with an agreement to hold another conference in Borama to achieve broader and more durable peace in Somaliland.
24/1/1993 The historic conference called the “Grand conference” began in Boroma.
5/5/1993 Mohamed Ibrahim Egal was selected as President of Somaliland and a National Charter was adopted. A year later, October 1994, a new Somaliland currency was introduced.
17/10/1994 Somaliland forces under the control of President Egal’ administration captured the Hargeisa Airport from clan militia supporting Jama Mohamed Qaalib and other members of the so-called “Federalist” opposition.
15/11/1994 Fighting broke out between the Government and the ‘Iidagale opposition in Hargeysa over control of Hargeisa Airport. In March, fighting also broke out in Bur’o between the Government and the Habar Yonis opposition – the latter supporting the ‘Iidagale.
15/10 -22/1/1997 In Hargeysa, the Guurti Congress which re-elected President Egal for a second term took place. This conference also put an end to hostilities between the Egal administration and its clan opposition.
6/8//2000 Parliament passed Law No. 14 (Xeerka Nidaamka Axsaabta) legalizing the formation of “political organizations”. This law prepared the way for the formation of political parties which subsequently competed in local and presidential elections.
31/5/2001: Referendum for the Constitution was held in Somaliland. Over 97% endorsed the Constitution and the reclamation of independence.
14/11/2001 Parliament approved an Electoral Law establishing the legal basis for appointment a National Election Commission.
18/12/2001 Parliament appointed most of the seven-member National Election Commission.
3/5//2002 President Egal died in South Africa. On the same day, Vice President Daahir Rayaal Kaahine was sworn to succeed as President. Thrree days later, Egal was buried in Berbera.
15/12/2002 Local Government Council Elections took place.
14/4/2003: The first Presidential Elections were held which President Daahir Rayaale Kaahin won.

Chapter 3: CLAN CLEAVAGES
3.1 WHY WE SELECTED THIS ISSUE
Clan cleavage was selected as focus issue for study firstly because clan is critical factor in Somali politics and social relations, secondly because the concept of clan cleavage has special relevance to the form of identity Somalis adopt, how Somalis relate and differentiate, they participate in the political process, and even how engage in armed conflict. We will see later that clan cleavage addresses only one aspect of the dual process of clan fission and clan fusion which occur jointly when social and political conflicts take clan form and dynamics.
3.2 BACKGROUND
The population comprises primarily five major clans – the Isaaq, the Gadabursi, the Harti (consisting of Dhubahante and the Warsangeli), the Isse, and the Gabooye, the last consisting of several groups segregated and despised by the others.6 Since no population is fixed, pure, or insular, the composition of Somaliland population has changed overtime and continues to change.7
Still, the population has not shifted drastically. These five major clans constitute the predominant settlers of Somaliland and share in common the following:
1. The same language, culture, and religion; 2. The same British colonial history;
3. A relatively homogenous population;8
4. A predominantly pastoral tradition;9
5. Clans distinguished by lineage have intermarried through the generations; and
6. A government, two-chamber parliament, a flag, and a national anthem giving them shared national identity.

All the predominant five major clans in Somaliland spill over into Ethiopia, Djibouti, or Puntland. Inhabitants also travel back and forth the porous border. During the union from 1960-1991, the subcultural and dialectic differences between Somaliland and Somalia were expressed in jokes and satire about how each group speaks, dresses, and behaves.

The last decade of the military regime created cleavages and conflict between the clans inhabiting Somaliland. However, since the 1993 Borama Conference, these clan cleavages were mostly mended and the clan conflicts reconciled.10

Before illustrating actual clan cleavages and conflicts that emerged in Somaliland, we will briefly discuss below a few key promoters of clan cleavage and escalators of conflict. Depending on issues and parties involved, the same promoters of clan cleavage and escalators of conflict can also serve as what helps bind clans and de-escalates conflict.

3.1.2 Clan as Crucible of Identity

Social anthropologists defined kinship in Somaliland as segmentary because it a system which differentiates people into groups. Not equally emphasized, however, is social integrative role of the clan since it binds people into a group with common identity while at the same time it distinguishes them from others. This system of kinship is based on a chain of paternal ancestors reaching back to a mythical founding ancestor (like Sheikh Isxaaq and Sheikh Isma’iil) whose name all members of the clan assume as their collective identity. It is a system that exclusively favors paternity and male dominance. This kinship system is a remarkable adaptation to the harsh conditions of life associated with the semidesert. Together, this elaborate kinship system and difficult ecology have together shape the social, and economic and political behavior of Somalis traditionally compete over limited resources, particularly water and grazing in their predominantly pastoral way of life.

Traditionally, agnatic relations define social and political relations. Clan is also the crucible of identity, social defense, and social security. The clan bound by lineage is thus the foundation of all social relations. A child born is considered a new addition not only to the nuclear family but also to the subclan and clan. Marriage and divorce take place involving the clan or sub-clan. On the one hand, the clan at once defends the individual from external attack and it extends support to members in time of need. On the other, it provides social control to avoid collective reprisal by or contribution of blood compensation to an aggrieved group.

This is why the first thing the child learns to memorize is his or her lineage – reckoning a chain of ancestors from one’s father to a distant and perhaps mythical founder of the clan who lived as far as the 8th or 9th Century – the time Islam came to Somali shores. Presumably, the chain of ancestors a child memorizes could be much longer today if Islamization did not foster disowning ancestors who held non-Islamic, indigenous beliefs.

The clan system is thus pre-existing, continuing, and pervasive. It is a structure that permeates all social relations. In time of financial and social problems, it is the clan and sub-clan that come to the assistance of the victim. In birth and death, marriage and divorce, employment and joblessness, war and peace, the clan pervades and influences social relations, for better or worse.11

Nothing – including successive governments – has so far shown to be a viable alternative to the clan system. On the contrary, the political system itself has become infused and shaped by the clan system. So long as a viable alternative does not exist, social relations will remain bound to the clan system. The elaborate remittance system of contemporary Somalis is in fact only a modern adaptation to the preexisting system of reciprocal assistance. So too is the warfare and internecine violence which often baffles the outsider. When the person dies, it is mostly the clan and sub-clan who buries him/or her. They arrange the burial, pay the expenses, and carry out the pertinent religious rituals.

3.1.3 Clan Fusion and Clan Fission

By its nature, the clan system is both a binding and distinguishing factor. On the one hand, it fosters cohesion among members sharing lineage. On the other, it distinguishing and separates some members from others reckoning different ancestors. The two concepts of fusion and fission refer respectively to the integration of members sharing lineage reaching to a distant ancestor and the distinction of clans into smaller sub-clans sharing a proximal ancestor or no known ancestor.

Clan fusion and fission occur simultaneously, giving social relations a ceaseless dialectic. Fusion and fission may unite “cousins” sharing a close or distant ancestor. The same two groups locked in conflict may also form union against others with whom they share no close or known ancestry. These twin processes of fusion and fission, deeply rooted in Somali society and psyche, render the Somali mind preoccupied and crowded. They also train the Somali mind to remarkable complexity and agility, particularly in social and political relations, while immersing it in a sea of confusion and contradictions.12

Historically, the causes of interpersonal and inter-clan conflict centered on land, grazing and water. As clans fought with one another, cohesion among their members increased. Old alliances broke and new ones were formed. Hence the process of fusion and fission took place with dizzying frequency until a central government emerged and public attention shifted to competition over power and political representation.

Contemporary power politics – in particular competition over the resources and privileges of the state – replaced disputes over land, grazing, and water since independence in 1960. Traditional group distinctions and myths were superimposed on new realities of urban life and politics. Following the collapse of the state, disputes on land and territory re-emerged in both rural and urban areas. These disputes often involved clans living in contiguous geographic and rural areas or over plots of land in urban centers. Hence, the process of clan fusion and fission remain relevant today, as they were in the past but with greater complexity and dynamic.

3.1.4 Delusion of Clan Superiority

Myth-making is an essential feature in the identity and cohesion of individuals and groups everywhere. Somalis are no different. However, their myth-making centers on the clan and sub-clan. To underscore the problems that such myth-making along clan lines creates, Bulhan has coined the term of delusion of clan superiority whose psychology and social role he details elsewhere.13

No clan, however large or small, accepts any degree of inferiority. Each clan considers itself as the most cultured, generous, and courageous. All clans valorize their warriors in the folktales, poems, and songs. In so doing, they perceive themselves as heroic and they take pride no only in who they imagine themselves to be but also who they convince themselves to be. Because of delusion of clan superiority, each clan or sub-clan believes itself to be right in dispute with others, however wild their claims or wishes may be from the perspective of others. It also expects its members to follow the clan perspective, right or wrong. There is no built-in check or control. Complicating matters, this delusion of clan superiority and myth-making are harbored by every clan. Hence, every conflict, however large or small, tends to be interpreted in terms of clan.

The delusion of clan superiority serves an important function for the clan. It fosters cohesion among members. It also gives unassailable grounds for the identity and pride of member. But the delusion of clan superiority takes on explosive and destructive features when conflict arises among clans who equally are convinced of their superiority and infallibility. Often, it is weak parties to conflict who take this approach. The delusion of clan readily invoked to rally the clan, those who can not feel inadequacy resort to it, confirming Alfred Adler’s thesis that deep in superiority complex lies inferiority complex.

Armed conflict is often preceded by strident expression of old and new myths and re-assertion of clan superiority. In fact, these myths and delusion of clan superiority are articulated not only in oral narratives and conversations but also in poetry. Ironically, long after the conflict is resolved, the poems remain in the consciousness and conversation of people, with the possibility that they will serve as stimuli for future conflict.

Post-independence politics did not change the delusion of clan superiority. It only re-directed it to new political landscape, to new forms of competition and conflict. During the 1980s and 1990s, the delusion of clan superiority took strident forms instigating and contributing to armed conflict involving supporters of the regime.

After the collapse of the regime, it lost the controls and moderating influence which the state, monopolizing power and violence, had imposed on it. Hence, wars broke out even among clans like the Isaaq who fought in solidarity against the regime of Mohamed Siyaad Barre. Armed conflicts deescalated after the 1993 Borama conference which started inter-clan dialogue and reconciliation.

Following it, a government emerged to moderate the delusion of clan superiority. Since then, dialogue and cooperation gradually replaced the delusion of clan superiority and armed conflicts it fostered.

3.1.4 Clan Cleavage and Clan Conflict

Clan cleavage and clan conflict are critical topics for understanding war and peace in Somaliland. However, a few caveats must be mentioned at the outset.

Firstly, clan cleavages always go hand in hand with clan alliance as integral aspects of clan fission and clan fusion. Thus, where there is clan cleavage, so too is clan alliance somewhere. The elaborate genealogy of Somalis gives rise to many possibilities of clan cleavage and clan alliance wherever clan integration at different levels of the genealogical tree.

Secondly, clan cleavages do not independently or necessarily lead to armed clan conflict. Clan cleavages rarely erupt into clan conflict without antecedent differences or conflict of interest first between individuals which evolve into differences or conflicts between nuclear families, extended families, and then larger clan conflicts. The lineage system offering different levels of group identity and distinction, reinforced by the tradition of mutual defense, canalizes these mundane differences or conflicts at the individual level into complex clan conflicts. However, not all differences or conflicts evolve into clan conflicts. Only those interpersonal conflicts that meet the criteria of social traction evolve into larger group conflicts.14

Thirdly, Somalis tend to exaggerate conflicts among individuals and small groups into clan conflicts involving all members of the clan. The ethical, social, or legal violations of a political leader, a military officer, and even a thief are readily identified with and condemned along with his clan. Although good done by an individual is also generalized to the group, Somalis are more likely to generalize individual misdeeds into clan misdeed. In addition, the condemnation generalized to the clan goes hand in hand with collective punishment.

Finally not all members of a clan participate equally in clan conflicts. In every clan conflict, there are members who stay apart from the conflict or even sympathize with their supposed “enemy clan”. But such individuals are forgotten in time of clan conflict and punishment meted out for them in equal measure to those in their clan who foment or actively participate in the conflict.

In short, then, Somali lineage system gives rise to many possibilities of clan cleavages and alliances which remain latent and inactive until social, political, or personal conditions reactive and give them new life. Conflicts identified with clans are social constructions which evolved from individual conflicts. These social constructions have power to the extent that the majority of society takes them and treats them as reality. So long as the parties to conflict accept these social constructions as reality, they become prisoners to it and possibly shed blood.

3.1.6 Clan Cleavages and Conflict before 1991

The most tragic and ruinous clan cleavages and clan conflict in recent decades is the armed conflict which pitted the supporters of Mohamed Siyaad Barre’s regime and the Isaaq clan, led by the Somali National Movement from 1981-91. This protracted of war between citizens and their supposed government had clearly shown the Isaaq that neither shared Somali identity nor Islamic faith could moderate the scorched earth policy of the regime against them, culminating in the destruction of cities and systematic mass murder.

From 1960, the Isaaq were disillusioned with the voluntary union with Somalia. The attempted coup of Sandhurst-trained officers in 1962 was an early indicator of this disillusionment. Popular songs and poems of the time also underscored disillusionment with the union. That a majority of the Isaaq did not vote for the referendum on the union in 1964 was another signal of disillusionment with the union. But that signal was ignored.

Like most Somalis, the Isaaq welcomed the military coup of 1969 and its promises of revolutionary change. However, by 1972, their elation turned into despair. They found incontestable proof that the system of inequity in sharing of power, development projects, and social services continued as in the past and in some respects intensified after 1972. By the mid-1970s, the regime that supposedly “buried tribalism” turned extremely clannish and nepotistic in its civil services, the armed forces, and almost all public sectors.

The Siyaad Barre regime which came to power in 1969 with promises of revolutionary change and Pan- Somali Unity had in a few years degenerated into a tyrannical regime using clan division and clan conflict to sustain its hold on power. The primary bulwark of the regime came from three Daarood clans – the Mareexaan, the Ogaadeen, and the Dhulbahante, given the acronym of MOD Alliance from abbreviation of their names. The Mareexaan to which the dictator belonged were leaders of the pack. The Ogaadeen provided mostly the military officers and foot-soldiers. The Dhulbahante, like other two clans, participated in different aspects of the regime but they dominated the National Security Services headed by a Dhulbahante who was also a son-in-law of the dictator.

The 1977-78 war with Ethiopia, ostensibly initiated to advance Pan-Somali unity, degenerated into clan competition and conflict even within Somali armed forces who supposedly were to liberate other Somalis . The 1978 coup attempt after the war, the first of coup of its kind since the military regime took power in 1969, was led and dominated by one clan. When it failed, the military regime embraced clanism even more passionately and clearly, persecuting members of other clans it deemed opponents, real or perceived.15

By 1981 the Isaaq, which constitutes the largest clan-family in Somaliland, formed a political movement – the Somali National Movement (SNM) – to fight and topple the military regime. The armed conflict between the SNM (the Isaaq) and the military regime escalated in subsequent years, leading to destruction of cities in the summer of 1988. In particular, Hargeisa was razed to the ground by the heavy bombardment and its surviving residents were strafed all the way to the Ethiopian border by government planes.16 Among the causes encouraging the Isaaq to take up arms against the regime were:

- They found inequity in the parliamentary representation, ministerial appointments, and key posts in the armed forces and the police.
- They found unequal representation in the civil administration and economic development of their territory;
- The flow of their civil servants, professionals, and businessmen to Mogadishu undermined the development of their territory;
- They felt discriminated in employment and job promotion in the civil service and, after 1975, they were systematically demoted or dismissed from the armed forces, the police, and the civil service;
- A disproportionate numbers of Isaaq officers were sent in the most dangerous front of the 1977-78 war with Ethiopia; some of them were taken out of prison a day before they were sent to the front. Many of these officers concluded that they were being selectively eliminated by the regime.

The heavy bombardment of Hargeisa in the summer of 1988 and the strafing of surviving inhabitants all the way to the Ethiopian border remain etched in the mind of the Isaaq. Persecution of Isaaq, torture of their intellectuals, and indiscriminate murders (like the massacres at Maka Durduro and the incident at Gazira Beach) had convinced them that they were target of clan cleansing.

The May 18, 1991 withdrawal from the failed union of July 1960 was thus a product of thirty years disillusionment with the union and dream of pan-Somali unity. Even then, the decision to withdraw from the union found near unanimous support when citizens of Somaliland realized other Somalis neither understood their grievances nor seemed prepared to give them due share in a newly reconstituted state. Thirteen years of relative peace and self-rule demonstrated that Somaliland can do better on its own, without union with Somalia and acrimony with its ruling elite. These thirteen years and their results consolidated the resolve and support for independence.

3.2 THE CURRENT SITUATION

Somaliland entered the 1990s with the clan as the pre-existing and overarching structure. Following the collapse of the regime in January 1991, Somaliland began the process of clan reconciliation and rebuilding the peace. On May 18, 1991, it declared unilateral reclamation of independence. The processes of clan reconciliation and of rebuilding peace took some years, with occasional hiccups and a flare up of armed conflicts. Yet, despite successive wars, clan settlements remained more or less the same. Although unity and peace prevail in the western regions, inhabitants of Sool and Eastern Sanaag have not fully participated in the new polity, even when the a significant number of their elite partake in its administration.

The desk study underscored the central role and influence of clan in Somali society. It affirmed that six major clans traditionally inhabit Somaliland - the ‘Isa, the Gadabursi, the Isaaq, the Dhulbahante, the Warsangali, and the Gabooye. The Isaaq constitute the dominant clan in Somaliland. The Dhulbanhante and the Warsangeli are branches of Harti - a subclan of the Darood. There are other minority clans - like the Madigaan the Akisho - who inhabit Somaliland. However, these are significant minorities whose number, political influence, and presence is hardly noticed. The Gabooye also suffer similar invisibility and inaudibility but their number is more significant and their participation in the society more extensive, despite the traditional myths and social distance that segregate, despise, and devalue them.

3.2.1 Clan Cleavages and Conflict After 1991

The armed conflict between the Isaaq and the regime of Mohamed Siyaad Barre which started in 1981 exacerbated clan division in Somaliland and had immense impact on the relations among clans particularly for the six years from 1991-1997. The ten years during which the regime carried out scorched earth policy against the Isaaq had left bad blood not only between the Isaaq and the regime’s key Daarood supporters also between the Isaaq and the other inhabitants of Somaliland.

After ten years of guerrilla warfare, the SNM fighters were battle-tested and hardened. They also inherited large caches of weapons, in some instances tanks and heavy guns, left by the retreating forces of the regime. Thus, after the collapse of the regime, prospects for bloody and intractable inter-clan wars loomed large between the Isaaq and the Gadabursi in the west and between other Isaaq and the Harti in the east. The Isaaq fighters from the battle zones and the civilians from the refugee camps in Ethiopia returned to their traditional areas of settlement with bitter feelings of revenge against the non- Isaaq whom they considered sworn allies of the fallen regime.

One of the leaders of the SNM guerrillas explained the intensity of passion for revenge among his fighters. Intoxicated with victory and delusion of clan superiority, they wanted to unleash maximal violence against their “enemies”. On the other hand, a Gadabursi peace activist who tirelessly worked for the cause of reconciliation described similar sentiments among the Gadabursi, later intensified by feeling of siege and occasional local skirmishes. Both guerrilla leader and the peace activist described in graphic words the mutual feeling of animosity that propelled each group to disaster if cool heads on both sides did not prevail.

The main instigators of clan division and conflict in the 1980s were not only political differences toward the Siyaad Barre regime. There were also other instigators, most notably land disputes. The boundaries of clan settlements were never fixed. They were always fuzzy and dynamic. Population expansion and diminution often determined where the boundary of one clan or sub-clan began and ended. Periodic inter-clan wars brought new occupants and implicit demarcation once the victors grabbed more land and the vanquished move out.

Boundary disputes and grazing rights had always persisted among clans living in contiguous areas. The regime of Mohamed Siyaad Barre had exacerbated these land disputes and inter-clan conflicts. In its divide-and-rule program, the regime had imposed new regions. It also demarcated new district boundaries. These politically motivated changes rewarded some clans (those viewed as supporters of the regime) and they angered others deemed hostile or a threat to it. In addition, the hundreds of refugees from Ethiopia came to Somaliland in droves after the debacle of the 1977-78 war. They too had served as foot-soldiers and henchmen of the regime. Their passion for land grab was matched by Isaaq fear of being dispossessed. This consuming apprehension, reinforced by government decrees like Morgan’s “Letter of Death”, sent droves of Isaaq (including students and bankers) to join the SNM in the fight against the Barre regime.17

The SNM was identified as an Isaaq movement. Yet there were many Isaaq who either served the regime to its last days in persecution of the perceived enemies (including the Isaaq) or who simply stood on the fence at home or abroad despite the oppression and even genocide of the regime. On the other hand, there were non-Isaaqs within Somaliland who fought the regime tooth and nail, as did some of the Isaaq.

Exemplar persons among the non-Isaaq opponents of the regime are Colonel ‘Abdiraxmaan Aw ‘Ali and Colonel (of the Gadabursi clan) Si’iid Ali Giir (of the Dhulbahante sub-clan of the Daarood).18 On the other hand, there were many Isaaq henchmen (even hangmen) of the regime who quickly found forgiveness from their clansmen after the collapse of the regime. This fact later produced new ironies which remain unresolved. The sight of these men in society and in the higher echelons of power evokes seething anger among the survivors who sacrificed their lives for freedom from injustice and tyranny.

3.2.2 Examples of Clan Cleavage and Conflict

A month after the collapse of the Barre regime on January 26, 1991, the SNM fighters captured most of the territory formerly called the British Protectorate of Somaliland. The Isaaq-Daarood clan cleavage and conflict was replaced by Isaaq-Gadabursi and Isaaq-Harti conflict which had festered during the 1980s but now took the stage.

In early February 1991, the SNM fighters attacked Dila and Borama, aiming to capture government installations.As the political difference over the authority and future of Somaliland were resolved, the boundary disputes of contiguous clans came to the fore. A case in point concerned the fuzzy boundary between Baki and Gabiley districts which created serious dispute between the Reer Nuur of the Gadabursi clan and the Jibriil Abokor of the Isaaq clan. The two sub-clans disputed over control of the agricultural area known as Eel-Barde.

The two sub-clans historically settled in contiguous area. Generations from the two sub-clans intermarried, linking most of them as in-laws and in maternal kinship. However, the politics of the Barre regime had pushed the two sub-clans into different political camps, causing bad blood among the two sub-clans. In addition, the residues of the war against the dictator and its bitter consequences diminished the traditional respect for marital bonds and neighborliness which the two sub-clans shared. By early 1993, the simmering conflict over control of Eel-Barde turned into fierce fighting between these two sub-clans. Elders from the two sub-clans put every effort to stop the armed conflict, but they failed. The clan conflict continued, threatening larger clan conflagrations. Only when the newly elected and fledgling government of Mohamed Ibrahim Egal sent armed forces to the disputed area did the conflict subside and the conflicting sub-clans moderate their dispute.

Gadabursi and Isaaq live contiguously in other districts with ill-defined boundaries. Disputes resulting from the demarcation of boundaries continue to be source of clan cleavage and conflict friction. For instance, the boundary between the newly established district of Dila and Gabiley remains undefined; so too is the boundary of Lughaya district whose predominant (if not exclusive) inhabitants are today Gadabursi. The dispute came to a head in the local elections of 2002 and presidential elections of 2004. The Sa’ad Muse of the Isaaq clan argued that the Gadabursi where extending their boundary to areas should be disposed of their property (including their businesses and imported goods at the seaport) and ultimately of their land.

Like other clans who were locked in conflict with clans settled in contiguous area, the Gadabursi were also entangled with territorial disputes with the ‘Iise. A case in point is the land dispute which in mid- 1991 grew into open conflict between the Gadabusi and the ‘Iise. The immediate cause of the conflict was a dispute over Biyo Kulul Valley located in Dambel District in Region Five of Ethiopia. The conflict spilled over into Somaliland. Again, the traditional clan leaders of the two clans with the help of the Region Five authorities tried to settle the problem. They succeeded to achieve only ceasefire among the warring clans. Subsequently, the conflict continued for years with low-level friction between the Gadabursi and the ‘Iise.19

Another example is the clan cleavage and conflict of 1991-2 in Sanaag. There, the Muse Isma’iil of the Habar Yoonis subclan and the Bi’iido of the Habar Je’lo subclan were poised for armed conflict with the Harti, mainly the Warsengli and to a less extent the Dhulbahante sub-clans. The first group were Isaaq; the second, Daarood. Although belonging to different clan-families tracing to different original and perhaps mythical ancestors, the two groupings shared settlement and intermarried for generations. However, politics of the Barre regime created a widening chasm between them. The Isaaq subclans fought against the Barre regime after it persecuted them and dispossessed their land. The Harti subclans defended (at least sympathized with) the regime.

The conflict came to a head mainly around ‘Erigaabo, the regional capital, after the collapse of the regime. This conflict, like others in the west, was partly a continuation of different political stand the two camps took toward the regime but it was largely a conflict over land and political dominance. The Isaaq held fast to the view that the Harti inhabitants in the area took advantage of the regime’s animosity and persecution of them, partaking in their dispossession of land and property. The Harti insisted that the Isaaq subclans were taking advantage of their new found victory and implementing an expansionist policy.

The conflict would have devastating effect on the region, provoking wider conflagration. However, a group of elders, politicians, and intellectuals from Sanaag rallied to the cause of peace in the region. Dialogue and reconciliation between the conflicting sub-clans of the Isaaq and the Daarood inhabiting the region seemed impossible, given intense acrimony, grievance, and delusion of clan superiority which festered for years. However, the long period of patient and careful negotiation by the elders, politicians, and intellectuals bore fruit in the end. As a result, the armed conflict which would have caused havoc and bloodshed in the region was averted, although a few skirmishes took place in the process. This peaceful intervention and clan agreement demonstrated that the people of Somaliland can settle their dispute without external intervention.

As the Isaaq-Gadabursi and Isaaq-Harti conflicts susided, inter-Isaaq conflicts erupted in 1992. For instance, clashes between Habar-Yonis and Habar-Je’lo broke out in Bur’o in January 11, 1992. Among the ostensible triggers of this conflict was the attempt by the administration of ‘Abdiraxmaan Axmed ‘Ali to disarm clan militia and form a national military force. But the Haber Je’lo interpreted this program differently. They understood the demobilization program was intended to weaken them while empowering their enemies.

The war that erupted between the Habar Je’lo and the government (read Habar Yoonis) on January 11, 1992 had in fact its mundane precipitant and justification. A vehicle owned by a member of the Habar Je’lo was commandeered by some members of the Habar Yoonis. The Habar Je’lo set a deadline by which the Harbar Yoonis were to return the commandeered vehicle. Before the deadline elapsed, the Habar Yoonis requested for an extension. The Habar Je’lo accepted. In the intervening period, the Habar Yoonis prepared for war. When the second deadline elapsed, the Habar Je’lo fired a few rounds to the section of Bur’o where the Habar Yoonis predominate. This gave the Habar Yoonis a pretext for launching the all-out assault for which they prepared. From that point on, this inter-clan war turned disastrous until clan negotiations settled it.

Nine months later, another war broke out in and around Berbera. This war too was presented as a war between the government of Abdirahman Ahmed Ali (Tuur) and a recalcitrant clan who hindered the government’s plan for peace and national development. The central bone of contention was control of Berbera and its port – the primary gateway for imports and exports of Somaliland. The Tuur Administration wanted control of the port and perhaps beyond in order to establish its authority and generate revenues it desperately needed. The ‘Iise Muuse clan for whom Berbera and its environs are their traditional area of settlement saw it differently. Firstly, they suspected other motives when, as they were asked to hand over the port of Berbera, other strategic locations (like the Hargeisa Airport) remain in the hands of clan militia. In short, they interpreted the so-called government move as an invasion of their land and rights by the Habar Yoonis or generally the Garxajis to which he belonged.

The ensuing war which broke up soon lost its lofty justifications of building a national government into a nasty clan war pitting primarily the Habar Yoonis and the ‘Iise Muuse. Fighting broke out in Berbera, after a government-supported militia moved into the city and provoked armed clan opposition. The fighting continued sporadically for over six months. In October 1992, opposition clan militia expelled the pro-government militia. Fortunately, the war did not take long before it was resolved in clan conference, called Tawfiiq Conference, which began on October 28, 1992 in the town of historic of Sheikh. The conference resolved not only the armed conflict but also agreed to plan another conference in Borama in 1993 to achieve broader clan reconciliation and more durable peace in Somaliland.

The eruption of armed conflict among the Isaaq first in Bur’o in 1992, then in Berbera the same year, later in Hargeisa in 1994, then Bur’o in 1995, had shown the failure of the SNM Isaaq to develop a coherent transitional program and an equitable system of government. Worse, after victory, the SNM politicians and fighters acted out their old personal differences and clan rivalries in Ethiopia. As a result, they broke up into competing and warring camps, playing a game of tit-for-tat. Abdirahman Ahmed Ali (Tuur), the last Chairman of the SNM and elected President of the transitional government in May 1991, could not bridge differences among the camps or consolidate power. Some say he even intensified intensified the old rivalries and camps by carrying out decisions he secretly or arbitrarily made. Ineffective authority and lack of consensus on government also gave opportunity for clan militia, armed gangs called dayday (the equivalents of mooryaan in Mogadishu or jirii elsewhere), and unethical businessmen determined to make profit in conditions of desperation. Each of these also aggravated the clan cleavages and conflict. For instance, each armed clan militia encouraged other clan militia to remain vigilant and organized. Crimes committed by individuals brought reprisals and collective punishment of the criminal’s clan. The anarchic and violent behavior of the dayday, sometimes resulting in murder, called forth the traditional blood-payment which, because of their excessive number, bankrupted clans and made their members candidates of reprisal.

Perhaps the only salutary effect of the clan cleavages and clan conflict that erupted among the Isaaq during the early 1990s and subsequently in 1994-6 is that the non-Isaaq population in Somaliland understood that the Isaaq are not a permanently unified clan organized to their assault, oppression, or decimation. Seeing that the Isaaq could viciously fight one another reduced their old myths, insecurities, and fears. Some of them (like the Gadabursi elders and intellectuals) were so moved and motivated by this understanding that they joined the role of peacemakers among Isaaq clans locked in conflict.

The historic Borama Conference of 1993 was the result. Subsequently, the Council of Elders (the Guurti), formed by the SNM during the war against the Barre regime, was enlarged to include other members in its rank. It also found new vigor and role when the SNM which created it had floundered soon after victory. The selection of a new president, Mohamed Ibrahim Egal, had also helped because he was the most seasoned politician of the lot. A leader in the campaign for independence in the late 1950s and a former Prime Minister, Egal knew the fundamental requirements of building a government. An exceptionally articulate man, his appeal for disarmament found ready ears and willing public. He also knew not only the art of when to charm others when this suited his interest but also how to browbeat and even demean his opponents.

Many to this day remember with fond memories the procession of clan militia in the Hargeisa Stadium, marching with the guns (sometimes accompanied by tanks and vehicles) with commitment to demobilize and hand over their weapons to the new government.20 There are three significant aspects to this voluntary demobilization program. Firstly, the armed clan militia did not simply hand over their arms and disappear. They and their arms were integrated into the newly established armed forces. Secondly, the public who watched them march in the stadium were initiated and socialized to legitimacy of the new government. Thirdly, the absence of clan militia (like the ‘Iidagale clan militia) who promised to participate in the demobilization program but did not gave hint of troubles to come. A year later, the reservation of the ‘Iidagale clan militia had developed into an open challenge of the government.

The immediate precipitant of this war concerned control of the Hargeisa Airport. The ‘Iidagale militia did not want to hand over the airport. This denied the government symbolic and real control it desperately needed. In reality, the causes of this conflict are many and controversial. Nonetheless, the armed conflict pitted first between the ‘Iidagale and the government – the latter recruiting difference clans, giving its forces the unflattering name of marya-allool, a mat made of, multicolored rags. The armed conflict mushroomed into a war between the government and the Garxajis when the Habar Yoonis joined the war on the side of ‘Iidagale ancestral kin. Had the war been between the Habar Awal (the President’s clan) and the Garxajis, the clan cleavages would follow primordial path and degenerate into a purely clan war, as in Bur’o in Janurary 1992 and Berbera in spring 1992. The difference here was that Egal mobilize different clans into the war. The government forces included the Gadabursi, the ‘Iise, the Habar Awal, the Arab, the Isxaaq, the Habar Je’lo and others.

This array of forces– had tragic consequences but it also gave rise to new national identity and unity. The armed conflict also gave Egal execuse to extend his term which supposedly was to end in 1995, a few months after the armed conflict with the ‘Iidagale erupted. This fact affirmed the suspicion that, if war is not a royal road to power, it is a convenient justification of a leader to hang on to power and to legitimize his authority. In fact, only after the conflict subsided in 1996 did Mohamed Ibrahim Egal turn his attention to the national constitution and his re-election for another term.

By 1997, his skillful orchestration of his supporters and concession to his opponents won him the reelection. When his term was about to end in 2002, Egal became embroiled in political conflict with the Habar Je’lo whom he would have isolated and forced into submission, as he had done so with the Garxajis. Such orchestrated war might would probably have postponed the schedule presidential elections and automatically extend his term. But fate had a different design. He died in May 2002.

3.2.3 Clan Cleavages Persist

Many politicians, intellectuals, and poets had preached the evil consequences of the clan system. Criticism of clanism (mistakenly called “tribalism”) was in vogue for years after independence. Clan and clanism were publicly denounced, buried in public rituals, and condemned as the greatest barriers to development. Yet the politicians and the intelligentsia who most denounced it had shown to harbor clanism and clan cleavages in society.

Instead of denying its existence or attempting to root out, Somaliland chose to hold the bull by its horns. It embraced clan as a critical factor in war and peace and incorporated it into its political system (see Chapter 5). In accepting clan as a fact of life, perhaps a permanent structure in Somali society, Somaliland was able to solve most armed conflicts which broke out following the collapse of the regime in 1991. However, although the public and the politicians have so far accepts clan and its integration into politics, there are regional imbalances and differential opportunities which once again provoke social cleavages of which evoke clan grievance and resentment.

Take for instance the problems of regional imbalance and differential social opportunity. Clan and settlement are often coterminous. Somaliland is mainly divided into East-West. Easterners tend to be pastoral. Agriculture predominates in the West, although residents there seldom describe themselves as agriculturalists. They too describe themselves as xoollo-dhaqato which literally means pastoralist. This is in part because pastoral values dominate the culture.

Because the capital city, Hargeisa, is located in the western part of the country, clans in the eastern regions often complain about regional imbalance in employment, business, and social services. Those who live in the Western Regions argue that they pay taxes and carry inordinate burden to maintain the needs of government serving all regions share in common. Such divergent views give occasion to regional cleavages, sometime clan cleavages since settlement and clan are coterminous.

But divergent views and clan cleavages do not take the east-west divide. They are endemic throughout Somaliland. Cities are rapidly growing in Somaliland. They have become centers of gravity for all clans, including refugees from Somalia and Ethiopia. Residents of rural areas who previously produced food and human resources for themselves and society are becoming more impoverished due to low investment in their education, health, and economic development. They are moving in droves.

Those clans who live in and around cities, particularly the capital city, have had greater access to government, business, and international organizations. Hargeisa is the capital, serves as the seat of the central government and its bloated bureaucracy. It is also the venue for big hospitals, schools, and businesses. For this reason, most clans settled near and distant, have moved to Hargeisa, with hopes of improved income and quality of life. Frustration with poor housing, crowding, and unemployment is intensifying as are anomie, alienation, and anonymity of people who in the past were rooted in a community, found social support from the clan, and had pride in their identity, even if that pride hoisted on delusion of clan superiority.

The local and presidential elections of 2002 and 2003 respectively have shown the persistent influence of clan on the political parties that were supposed to replace clan politics. The selection of candidates by the political parties and elections results have demonstrated that the politicians and the public alike can not shed their clan calculations and preferences in reaching national political decisions. How political parties and clan can work independently or without causing social confusion are new challenges facing Somaliland. More seriously, emerging concern on equity of government and political institutions are raising questions if Somaliland has indeed solved the problems which brought the military regime and the civilian administrations before it to their demise.

3.3 POTENTIAL ESCALATORS OF CLAN CONFLICT

The fieldwork shows the following key escalators of clan conflict in the history of Somaliland after 1991:

- Differences of relationship and loyalty to the regime of Mohamed Siyaad Barre. After the collapse of the regime, conflict emerged between the Isaaq who fought against the regime and the non-Isaaq who supposedly defended or at least sympathized with it.
- Competing interests and groupings among the SNM leaders who, although they risked their lives for liberty, seemed to understand little of how to nurture and develop Somaliland when conditions for such were ripe;
- State of confusion and anarchy which engender armed gangs like the dayday, lawlessness, and clan reprisals.
- Weak leadership which knows little how to forge alliance from different clans and interests, subduing opponents by force when peaceful political means fail.
- Profusion of arms and failure of demobilization programs because they evoke old clan cleavages and clan conflicts.
- Premature attempts to demobilize clan militia without building clan confidence and trust.
- Greedy and unethical businessmen who seek used clan cleavage to profit from lack of regulation and social despair.
- Elite united by their education, urban or western values, social privilege, and class arrogance but readily rally their clan in time of conflict among them.
- Unemployment and poverty which reduces otherwise decent and peaceful individuals into footsoldiers of others and fodders of clan conflict.
- International community that treats warlords and ineffectual leaders as representative of “clan cleavages” and honors or rewards them in contrived national conferences in plush, comfortable hotels abroad. (Somaliland was spared this corrosive and corruptive act of charity.)

3.4 POTENTIAL DE-ESCLATORS OF CLAN CONFLICT

The fieldwork also indicated the following de-escalators of conflict in the history of Somaliland since 1991.

- Public exhaustion from anarchy, war, and crime.
- A tradition of dialogue and reconciliation even as war rages on.
- The practice of forgiving enemies and forgetting old scores, preferring reconciliation opponents over reprisal.
- Use of religion and tradition to bridge clan cleavages and mediate conflict.
- A leader (like Mohamed Ibrahim Egal) who knows the basic requirements of governance, with skills to make friends and influence people.
- Absence or limited interference from the international community, particularly neighboring governments, whose interests derail the process of Somali reconciliation.
- A mixture of skillfully designed voluntary and involuntary demobilization program.
- Building confidence of protagonists by small steps and setting aside old scores.
- Local advocates of peace and midwives of reconciliation
- An external “enemy” that unifies the group or nation with its threats, real or bluff.

3.5 SUMMARY

Clan cleavages and clan alliances in Somaliland have existed for centuries. Therefore, they can not and will not be eliminated. They can be only canalized toward constructive ends. Clan cleavages, land disputes, and clan conflict pre-dated the Barre regime. However, the regime intensified these cleavages and disputes for it to divide-and-rule tactic.

Somaliland comprises five major clans each of them conditioned to clan socialization and myth-making. Clan is a crucible of identity, social defense, mutual support, and social insurance. Clan cleavages in Somaliland are important contributors to conflict. To understand these cleavages, the concepts of fusion and fission are critical. These refer to the twin processes by which clan differentiates and integrates groups. Both occur simultaneously. Where there is cleavage, so too is alliance somewhere.

Somali culture also conditions members to delusion of superiority where each member valorizes his clan and put down others. Clan identity and delusion of clan superiority, rooted to Somali culture and tradition, have been superimposed on urban life and politics, with deadly consequences. The regime of Mohamed Siyaad Barre in particular had pushed clan cleavages and clan conflict to their most destructive extremes. The Isaaq, disillusioned with union, were among those victimized by that regime and those who challenged it with arms.

After the collapse of the state, clan cleavages that arose between supporters and opponents of the regime reared their head. The SNM chose dialogue and reconciliation instead of confrontation and reprisal. The other clans reciprocated. As a result peace was on the mend.

The history of Somaliland and the participants underscore that Somaliland has come a long way to grapple and solve its primordial clan cleavages and forge a semblance of a nation. Clan cleavages exist to this day, and they will do so for years to come because genealogy and identity of the inhabitants depend and foster such cleavages. But these cleavages are dynamic and unpredictable, as the clan alliances which are their twin component, one never occurring without the other. This is Janus-faced character of Somali social relations and of human relations generally.

The question is not therefore to seek the impossible goal of eliminating the cleavages or their concurrent alliances, but to canalize clan cleavages and alliances toward peaceful coexistence of people. Tyranny and injustice bring forth the most violent forms of clan cleavages and clan conflict. A culture of dialogue, leadership with a sense of mission, system of check and balance – these give people the political space to bridge their different views and interests so that clan cleavages do not mushroom into clan conflict.

Today, people show less confusion and hypocrisy than in the past when clan was condemned and ritually buried in public as in the early 1970s, while it continued as a matter of practice. Somalilanders have accepted clan as a fact of life and included it as a criterion of constitutional power-sharing. The experiment has only begun, and it has so far done some good, but more needs to thought through and accomplished.

Chapter 4: EQUITY OF GOVERNANCE AND POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS

4.1 WHY WE SELECTED THIS ISSUE?

This topic was selected as focus issue because the desire for equity and justice were the primary motive of the armed struggle against the dictatorial regime of Mohamed Siyaad Barre. The pursuit of equity and justice brought greater suffering than anticipated. Targeted detention and torture of gave way to indiscriminate persecution. Summary executions of specific individuals led to mass murders and destruction of cities. The physical wounds and war trauma are still visible among the survivors.

Since 1993, the people of Somaliland had restored peace and formed their own government. We wanted to explore if the quest for equity and justice, in pursuit of which much blood was shed, has been attained in Somaliland during the past ten years. This exploration may show both the successes and failures of the system and path the people of Somaliland had chosen.

4.2 BACKGROUND

In the early 1990s, following the collapse of the regime, concerns focused on whether the people of Somaliland can find peace with one another and establish a government to replace the rampant anarchy and violence rampant in 1991. When peace was restored and central authority was established, the question of whether the existing system of governance and political institutions are equitable and just gained paramount significance for the people of Somaliland. The successes and failures of governance in Somaliland must be evaluated in a historical context.

Before colonial rule, Somalis governed themselves and evolved an egalitarian system. An open meeting of all males over the age 15 held a council (shir) to decide on critical issues including interpersonal and clan conflict. There were also elaborate but unwritten legal system which had its record of precedents to guide decisions, its lawyers and judges (called xeer beegti), its classification of ways to resolve disputes (from gar-maslax, gar-dadban, gar shareeco, garta guurti, and garta xeer beegti). It also had its proper way of presenting cases, its ethics of adjudicating disputes, and its means of enforcing decisions without use of prisons and established law enforcing agency. Among the remarkable things in this system is that neither judges nor lawyers were paid and that, in some instances (like Xeer ‘Iise) the system had twelve levels disputants could appeal a decision.21

In the early decades when colonial, Somalis took the perspective, as one British colonial officer observed in the 1930s, “If you must govern, then govern us justly, and leave us alone.” As it turned out, Somalis were not governed justly nor were left alone.

British colonial started with minimum of investment in the late 19th Century.22 The British ruled Somaliland with minimum of investment until independence in 1960. To reduce costs and it had strategic advantage, the British used indirect rule, using traditional leaders and the local elite. Italians in contrast had imported settlers, stationed large forces, and developed banana plantations in Somalia. The difference of colonial past was not the most critical in creating a wedge but it contributed to the misunderstanding between the peoples of Somaliland and Somalia, at least in the 1960s.

Independence in 1960 was expected to reinstate the right to self-determination and promote development. Unfortunately, it did neither. Nine years after civilian rule, following a period of unprecedented corruption and nepotism, the armed forces took power by force. The military regime also failed, revealing similar corruption and nepotism to the civilian regimes. In fact, its revolutionary promises and rhetoric brought greater mass disillusionment. As pressure on the government increased, it became clan-oriented, using some as bulwark and indiscriminately persecuting others.

By the early 1980s, clan wars emerged under the cover of armed political movements. After the regime’s collapse, the constituting parts of society engaged in clan and sub-clan conflict, aggravated by warlords and armed militia determined to have their way by using the gun. In the 18 May, 1991 Burao Conference, the people of Somaliland decided to secede from Somalia, or as Somalilanders prefer, to reclaim their independence.

4.3 CURRENT SITUATION

Key to understanding developments in Somaliland since 1991 is its home-made solution to armed conflict and anarchy that emerged after the collapse of the military regime. This home-made solution is in stark contrast to the massive resources deployed in restoring peace and governance in Somalia. Since 1991, over 30,000 soldiers were deployed and 14 reconciliation conferences held in foreign capital. Twelve years later, the results have been modest at best. Perhaps some lessons can be learned from the home-made solutions of Somaliland at minimum cost. As a result too, Somaliland may find the acknowledgement and encouragement it deserves for the progress in peace and the march toward democracy it has so far achieved.

4.3.1 Development of Beel System

The Provisional National Charter passed by the participants in the May 1991 conference stipulated a transitional period of two years during which the Chairman and Vice Chairman of the Somali National Movement (SNM), the archenemy of the collapsed military regime, would respectively serve as President and Vice President of the new “Republic of Somaliland.” However, this government did not make significant strides in restoring peace or developing government institutions.

Effective restoration of peace and development of government institutions followed the historic 1993 Conference in Borama. That conference, involving hundreds of representatives from various clans, and known as Guul Allah – Allah’s Victory – lasted for nearly five months, set the foundation for a de jure if not de facto State of Somaliland. The majority of the conferees selected a seasoned politician, Mohamed Ibraahim Egal, to be the President of the new government.23

One of the achievements of the Borama Conference is the introduction of a new system of government formed of the Beel System (based on clan representation and consensus) combined with a hybrid of Western political institutions. The foundation of the new hybrid system is a two-chamber Parliament, comprising of the Guurti (the House of Elders) and Wakiillo (House of Representative) each with 82 members distributed by various clans. The latter serves as legislature, the former is composed of traditional leaders and serves as the supreme authority. It focuses its efforts on maintaining peace and mediating disputes among clans and the various branches of government.

The Beel System was from the beginning viewed as a transitional system. Its achievement is not that it was the first to use a hybrid system, as some mistakenly claim. As we have seen before, the hybrid and confused system existed in practice. Whereas in the past the traditional was scoffed at yet used behind the scence, the Beel System openly advocated for an integration of the traditional and western and, more importantly, incorporated it into the existing political institutions.

The December 1996 Conference in Hargeisa supposedly changed from Shir Beelleed (clan conference), like that of the 1993 Borama Conference, into Shir Qaran (National Conference). Until then, the country was ruled using the National Charter passed in the 1993 Borama Conference. In reality, the difference between Shir Beelleed to Shir Qaran was more semantic than substantive. For whatever it was called, the same actors would have played in the political arena, with President Egal being who called the shots. At the time, his opponents called for a new Shir Beelleed to elect the President – a proposal which Egal disliked because the Habar Je’lo at the time were preparing to put up their candidate with the claim that it was turn to take the helm, the same way the Habar Awal took under Egal and the Habar Yoonis under Abdirahman Ahmed ‘Ali. By calling it Shir Beelleed, President Egal was turning over the table on the Habar Je’lo and set up a system of one-person-one vote by which he would still call the shots and win.

Intense debates on a new Constitution started during and after the December 1996 conference. The referendum of 31 May 2001 showed national consensus (about 97% approval) for the new Constitution which provided the legal foundation of Somaliland’s transition from the Beel System to multi-party democracy. Local and presidential elections followed in December 2002 and May 2003 respectively. Parliamentary elections that were to take place soon after have been postponed for two years with the justification that critical and controversial laws (including allocation of seats and demarcation of district boundaries) remain to be passed.

In short, Somaliland’s hybrid political system of governance has maintained peace and stability, although there have been periods in which armed conflicts have erupted or come close to erupting. This hybrid system is an innovation from which has Somaliland reaped significant benefits. Yet it is not a panacea, as shown by its limitations to develop an efficient and merit-based system of government. In particular, questions of clan and gender equity remain persistent, although the key actors endeavour to maintain the peace. Complaints of people being “hostages to peace” have surfaced in recent years because solution to genuine clan, regional, or gender grievances tend to be postponed for the sake of maintaining peace.

4.3.2 Ingredients of the Homemade Solution

In a nutshell, the lessons on how Somaliland restored peace in the Borama Conference in 1993 and in Hargeisa in 1997 can be summarized thus:

- The conference was organized and owned by Somalis. Since no foreign governments were involved, their conflicting interests (territory, power, strategic pursuit, money, or prestige) were not confounding factors as they have been in conferences organized for Somalia by the international community
- The locations were on the home turf. Most participants stayed with relatives, friends, and coattendees. Hence, the cost of the conference was minimal. In particular, there were no plush and expensive hotels, no planes or taxis, no commission on these service, no fees for organizers of conference (as for instance in Kenya).
- The conference was not for warlords or politicians committed to war if they do not get their aims or who used violence to keep their power even if reconciliation was achieved. Through public organization and pressure, Somaliland sidelined these elements.
- Clan elders and religious elders led the conference to use their moral and religious authority for mediation and moderation. Military officer bent on resolving differences through violence and and the Westernized elite whose vanity exceeds their competence were included in the process but not given leading role.
- Food and comfort were minimal. In fact, the more uncomfortable the venue, the quicker reconciliation work is completed; the more comfortable the venue (e.g. the Hilton or the like) the longer time spent on reconciliation with little result.
- The conference used Somali time, not European time. There was no rash or specific agenda to be completed in a specified time. The primary aim was achieving durable solution even if that took months. For instance, the conferences in Borama and Hargiesa took at least five months each.
- The conferences were inclusive. Great care was taken to include every group, hear its concerns, and where possible accommodate its interests and views.
- The modus operandi was consensus, not majority vote. This meant that every effort had to be made to find agreement among all clans, large or small.
- The language was Somali. This freed everyone to speak with oratory and personal style they like. It also freed the participants from the misplace authority of a foreigner who chairs meetings but really has no clue of Somalis and their way of settling disputes .

4.2.3 Strengths and Limitations

Good governance has not been practised in Somalia either before or since independence. It is for this reason that the Somali State born in 1960, lacking equity and justice, had failed. After the state collapse in 1991, Somaliland broke away from the union with Somalia and adopted a new approach to governance. In1993 the Somaliland National Charter was approved in Borama by the participants of the national peace conference, led by representatives of clan leaders. Subsequent to the conference, the role of clan elders and the clan system was institutionalized. Thus, from 1993 onwards, Somaliland practised a hybrid political system of governance that combines the beel (clanbased) system of government with modern western-style of government.

A government comprising a President, Vice President and a legislature was constituted. The legislature consists of two councils, the Guurti (House of Elders) and the Wakiilo (House of Representatives). Almost all clans are represented in the two houses of parliament. Each clan and sub-clan has been allocated a fixed number of seats in the legislature. This system gives wider political clan representation than the political systems that existed in the past, both during the military regime as well as during the civilian-led government preceding it. It also permits wider public participation.

The mandate of the Guurti includes initiating legislation relating to religion, traditions, and security. The Guurti also reviews and votes on legislation passed by the House of Representatives. Clan leaders that are not in Guurti still continue their role in peace-making and peace-building, managing conflicts, and mediating and handling disputes by using the customary law cases that have had serious social and political importance.

The constitution that replaced the National Charter in 1997 signalled, in theory at least, the transition from the Beel System to a multiparty electoral system of government. However, the transition did not take place until 2002. In December 2002 and May 2003, municipal and presidential elections took place. The election of parliamentarians (firstly the House of Representatives then of the House of Elders) was postponed to March 2005. Thus, the transition from the Beel System is not yet complete and may not be so even after the parliamentary elections in 2005.

The primary strengths of the Beel System are firstly that it gave representation in government to different clans, and secondly that it maintained the peace among different clans. Its primary limitations include its inability to develop or maintain efficient, merit-based, and stable political institutions. The rights of clans were not matched by commitment to merit. The transition to multiparty democracy has not yet brought the anticipated results. It seems to have been channelled the old grievance and debates through political parties – a case of old milk in a new container. Somaliland’s hybrid political system of governance is by many measures a success. Peace and stability has been maintained mainly because of the successful utilisation of the Beel System (institutionalisation of the clan in governance). Somaliland also achieved the planned transition to a multiparty electoral system.

However, the system is inefficient. It does not provide the necessary checks and balances. The members of the Guurti (mostly traditional leaders) are uninformed about the development of effective and efficient government institutions. The members of the Wakiillo (House of Representatives) are a mixed lot, the majority of whom are unaware of their mandate and their responsibilities. The judiciary, which is supposed to be independent and impartial, is woefully short on both accounts. The executive enjoys many of the powers not acceptable in a genuinely democratic system. Its responsibilities in budgetary and fiscal accountability are weak. In fact, it seems the more things change, the more they remain the same.

Herein lies the rub. Weak institutions, inadequate accountability, and low transparency in governance could bring down the nascent government, yet unrecognized by the international community. These factors can also break the fragile peace in Somaliland.

4.3.4 Participants’ Definition of Equity

As soon as we referred to equity, interviewees and focus group discussants asked what we meant by the concept. Left to explain what they understood by the concept, interviewees or focus group discussant came up with the following definitions:

- Equity as fairness in representation in parliament and the executive branch;
- Equity as just share in obtaining public resources, including jobs, land, and salaries;
- Equity as equal treatment before the law, law enforcement, and the judicial system;
- Equity in opportunities of education, employment, and business contracts, etc.

In-depth discussion of the topic brought more abstract definitions of equity. These included obtaining equal share in symbolic and subjective “resources” of the state, such how frequently a member of the clan obtained visible posts, like President, Vice President, or ministerial appointment which in reality did not bring substantial material or actual power to his kinsmen but provided him subjective and illusory gains in his private life or in the eyes of others. Often, such symbolic or subjective illusions turned as important and sometimes more important than the other definitions of equity.

The more obvious and accepted definitions referring, for instance, representation in government or fair share of public resources, invoked three key factors of inequity – gender, minority status, and regional distance from Hargeisa, the capital city.

Informant interviewees and focus group participants accepted the right of representation proportional according to group size in the population. However, there is no census in the country; hence, expectations of equity and declaration of rights tended to be fraught with confusion, controversy, and conflict. The lack of census gave impetus to delusion of clan superiority in Somali psychology and social relations.24 As a result, discussions quickly skidded into murky and tense debates of who is most unduly rewarded or aggrieved.

With these different meanings of equity, the key informant interviewees, the focus group discussants, and the informal group participants presented their views of how inequity persists in the governance and political institutions of Somaliland.

Our study shows that Somalis today have two contradictory attitudes toward government and its institutions. On the one hand, they invest much hope and interest; on the other, they take a jaundice view of government. Distrust, envy, resentment, and fear combine to make government the proverbial object you can not live with, yet you can not live without.

From our interviews we learn that people have invested much hope and interest in government during the last forty three years because they believe that:

- Government would offer sorely needed protection from personal and property attack;
- Government would be the neutral body adjudicating disputes and enforce its decisions;
- Government run by their own leaders would be compassionate and humane;
- Government, the largest employer and the primary “industry”, would provide jobs to citizens;
- Government would provide social services such as heath, education, and public works;
- Government would protect them from external enemies poised to oppress them Yet the history since independence has shown that government led by Somalis could indeed be worse than the colonial rule Somalis condemned, detested, and ejected forty four years ago. As a result, they took a jaundiced view of government. The question of equity evokes essential distrust of politics and political institutions. In some instances, one gets the impression that government inevitably is a veritable burden, a social curse, sometimes a violent monster.

Further exploration of the subject suggests that everyone has complaints of inequity, but none of the participants argued that the current government must be abolished altogether, or that the political system prevailing prior to 1993 should be re-established. In short, even while participants complained about one or another form of inequity, they showed open pride in what Somaliland achieved during the last ten years.

4.3.5 Forms and Patterns of Inequity

There was a near unanimity from the participants in the fieldwork that there is better equity since 1991 in Somaliland than there was in the thirty years since independence. However, most interviews affirmed that inequity in the different senses described above exists in Somali governance and political institutions.

A few of the participants stated that the search for “equity” predisposed the President of Somaliland to form a large and costly coterie of ministers (over twenty), their deputy ministers, and other superfluous ministers without portfolio (e.g. Minister of State). They added that appointment to the cabinet is one of his best ways of rewarding loyal persons and clans. Thus, his desire to win and keep supporters undermines a merit-based system. Such a system requires not only change in the way the President views his chief responsibilities but also in the public demand and expectations imposed on him.

One form of inequity participants in the study stressed is inequity the parliament. There is unanimity of views that the Beel System has proven to be useful and innovative in Somaliland since 1993. The participants affirmed that it secured peace and stability when armed clan conflict threatened to be frequent and disastrous. As hybrid system, combing tradition and modernity, it was no doubt innovative. Its consensus-based procedure to decide critical issues also allowed all groups to be heard and consulted. In recent years, however, the Beel System has been criticized because:

- It excluded women from representation in two houses of the parliament;
- Minority groups (particularly the Gabooye) have only symbolic representation;
- In the absence of census, clan representation has been arbitrary;
- The clan constituencies have system of control or accountability on their representatives;
- Representatives do not know well their role or responsibility, having been selected neither on knowledge nor experience in politics;
- Whether representatives know or do not know their role and responsibility, they tend to be to sell their vote to the executive branch;
- Current members in the House of Representatives do not push for election, conveniently postponed to March 2005, because most them know that they not be elected;
- The Guurti is replete with aged traditionalists whose contribution to peacemaking was critical but whose understanding of contemporary government is limited;
- The system of electing the Guurti remains conveniently ambiguous and their term not clearly defined.

Inequity in the executive branch was also discussed, but facts seemed murky and difficult to establish. In general, the participants in the fieldwork agreed that

- Not all clans found equal representation in the executive branch;
- Most of the ministers and vice ministers appointed were not chosen on merit but on dubious political calculations of the President;
- Loyalty to the President and the status quo, not competence or social commitment, gives one advantage in joining and staying in the cabinet;
- Because ministers from the same clan tended to head certain ministries, the assumption took hold that these ministries are the fiefdoms of certain clans;;
- A few ministers remain as fixtures in the cabinet, partaking in a game of musical chairs for years;
- Women and minorities were appointment to ministerial and vice ministerial posts only in 2003; even then, there are only two women ministers and one vice minister from the Gabooye.

Inequity in public resources brought heated debates among the participants, particularly minorities, war veterans, the disabled, and persons coming from eastern regions like Sanaag and Sool. The debates on equity in public resources took for granted that government is the primary employer and industry in the country, that every citizen had a right to a share of the public largesse, even while the fledgling government was strapped for resources. Ironically, even those who found jobs in government complained of inequity, thereby making the topic of inequity as pervasive as a common flu in cold seasons.

Participants from minority groups described the caste-like system which cordons them off into segregated neighborhoods, jobs, and social stigma. They described how society needs their presence and work, yet reduces them to invisibility and inaudibility. In particular, they complained about the minuscule number of their members who have been given opportunity for education and how the measly few working in government institutions are given low-level jobs or only as token jobs. When asked how many of their members worked in the civil service or the executive, they mentioned several including one Vice Minister of Health – the first ever in the history of Somaliland. A new complaint in the litany of Gabooye grievances is the increasing plunder of their land as pressure of migration into the city intensifies and the failure of local government, law enforcement, and the courts to protect their property.

Women argued that the system was exclusionary, unfair, and demeaning to women who actually bear the greater burden in society than men. They stated that women succor the children, nurse the sick, tend to the disabled, and today earn bread for the families who male partners, parent and son, waste away in unemployment, qat chewing, and tea-shop babble. Having characterized men as “parasites”, they added that women were denied education and employment, that they carried ot family chores while their brothers attended school, but that today they are forced to provide for the children and even husbands.

The war veterans affirmed that, despite their sacrifices to freedom and justice during the ten years of armed struggle, they have been forgotten by society and left to suffer neglect and injustice far greater than they have known in the past. They talked of bitter feelings in their observation of many who defended the dictatorial regime, some of whom allegedly committed capital crimes in its defense, today reaping the rewards of a good job or high office in government while the veterans who sacrifice theirs lives are reduced to systematic unemployment and abject poverty.

Participants from regions distant from the Hargeisa, the seat of the central government, argued that the system rewards whoever is close to them, invoking the provert: “Dheriga ninka u dhowbaa lafta la baxa” - He who is close to the pot obtains from it the choice bone. They stated that, as in the past, their regions have fewer schools, less health services, and lower investment in public works than the capital city and its environs. Those in and around Hargeisa also complained the burden on them brought on mostly by migration not from other Somaliland regions but also refugees from Ethiopia and Somalia. The discussed the high level of unemployment in their ranks, made most glaring by people in other regions holding high jobs and running thriving business. v Those who found government jobs complained that the rewards of which they are accused is actually smoke-and-mirrors which disguises their own embarrassment and frustrations. The explained that they stay in these jobs only because they hate to hang around in tea-shops and rely on hand outs (shaxaad) of friends and relatives. They discussed the lack of satisfaction in their jobs, absence of health insurance, pension, even chances of promotion based on merit. They also complained how the best job go to those who through clan or personal means have political clout.

When other participants discussed the corruption pervading the system, they answered that it is unrealistic to expect underpaid civil service to remain clean and accountable, that it is also naïve to have a bloated bureaucracy, driven not by merit but political aims, to set up efficient management or inspire employees to do a good job.

One form of inequity the participants describe with chagrin is the political (read clan) boundaries which the President and/or the Parliament demarcated to win the loyalty of one group, inadvertently displeasing others. In fact, the old and new district boundaries are products of political maneuvers of one regime or another. The absence of census and fixed settlements makes the problem of district and even regional boundaries intractable and intensely debated. Feelings of inequity arising from this evoke clan cleavages which can contribute to the cycle clan conflict.

4.3.6 Promise of Equity in Democracy

Somaliland has not only distinguished itself in the region by emerging from the ruins of war and mending the peace on its own ingenuity and resources. Somaliland has also taken the first footsteps toward democracy not by the prodding of other countries by its own initiative. These are indeed significant steps in a region where one-man rule has been the rule rather than the exception and where power is often contested with force of arms.

It is always difficult to achieve equity to the degree and the form people expect in Somaliland and elsewhere. Somaliland, like other countries has embraced democracy - a government of the majority, a government in which supreme power is vested in the people directly and/or in their representatives – is the best means of achieving toward equity. But accepting democracy in principle is one thing, putting it in practice another.

The first steps Somaliland put forward toward democracy is the National Charter signed in the Borama Conference of 1993. This charter was not based on one-person-vote principle because elections could not be held when the country was in the brink of anarchy and violence. The inter-clan wars in Bur’o in 1991 and Berbera in 1992 did not did not provide the necessary conditions for elections, nor did the weak and floundering government of Abdirahman Ahmed Ali (Tuur) prepare the people for peaceful transition of power. The Borama Conference was founded on clan dialogue and consensus and the National Charter approved by the representatives stipulated a transition period in which a national constitution would be prepared and elections would be held.

In fact, transitional period of the two years was extended by an inter-clan war which some believe was conveniently instigated by the President and his striding cabinet members. Whatever the reason for extending the transitional period, a national constitution was drafted and debated in the parliament. The opposition at first declared this draft constitution simply a paper ploy, a legal window-dressing, for the President to continue his one-man rule. By May 2001, the national voted on the constitution with remarkable discipline and peace. Over 96% of the registered voters and 97% of the approved voters had voted “yes” for the Constitution.

After a majority of the voters approved the Constitution, the National Election Commission proceeded to conduct local and presidential elections. After some delays and controversy, the local elections were held in December 2002 and in May 2003 respectively. Again, the elections proceeded peacefully and with broad participation in at least five of the six regions of the country. Nine political organizations contested in the local elections of which, as the Constitution stipulates, only the three political organizations with the highest votes could qualify for the designation of national “political parties” and compete in the presidential election.

The three parties that so qualified were UDUB, KULMIYE, and UCID. UDUB won the presidential election, even though its presidential candidate was from the minority Gadabursi clan. Contrary to what strident critics suggest, this shows that the Isaaq majority is not a monolithic clan united against their non-Isaaq compatriots. This development, the first time when a Gadabursi President won with the support of the Isaaq majority, shows that Somaliland has achieved a historic milestone when clan was not the only factor in choosing a candidate or reaching a national decision.

Despite their relative political immaturity and excessive feud, the political parties carried out these elections with remarkable peace and dignity. When KULMIYE lost the hotly contested presidential election by a small number of votes, it heeded to the public demand that it accept the decision of the court and give up its pursuit of power. This commitment to peace auger well for the future stability of Somaliland and for the democratic experimentation it started.

Still, the political parties must learn the difference between loyal opposition and destructive opposition. On the other hand, the government should not take, as it does today, winner-takes-all perspective. It must extend a hand of collaboration and consultation to the political parties who, jointly or separately, have their constituencies and public support. A government that gets stuck with petty personal conflicts is as dangerous as political parties that obsessively ferret for the failures and weakness of their political adversaries in power.

4.3.7 Poverty of Ideology and Clan Perspective

The clan system, particularly people’s internationalization of it as paradigmatic guide to life, constitutes the major impediments to the development of political parties in Somaliland. The Constitution of Somaliland was designed to limit the role of clan and clannism in politics. That is why a distinction was made between political organizations that competed in the local elections of December 2002 and political parties that competed for the presidential elections of May 2003.

Before the local elections, any group could form a political organization if they met basic requirements (e.g. registration, showing a specified list of members, holding a public conference, and electing officials in that conference). It was stipulated that only three political organizations that won the highest number of votes in the local elections in at least four of the six regions (hence demonstrated hence multi-clan and multi-regional membership) could promote to the status of political parties and to compete in the presidential elections.25

Despite ostensible attempts to reduce the influence of clan in the elections, the political parties could not subjectively and objectively escape the power of the clan system in the political process. Firstly, each political organization and later political party was identified with the clan of its Chairman and General Secretary, regardless of their political views. Secondly, the political organizations themselves put forth candidates that satisfy the clan that predominate each district. Thirdly, the voting followed along clan lines as did later the election of mayors and other key posts. The one remarkable difference, heralding a historic advance, is that a candidate from a minority clan was elected President in May 2003.

What thus counts most in the Somali political process is the clan of the individual, not his political outlook and commitment. Somalis assume that they know your views and commitments if they know your clan. In addition, political parties think in clan terms to in political campaigns. Candidates for political office also rally their clan to win political office.

In short, clan is ideology, a creed, a weltanschauung. It is also an organizing schema to life and to the political process. So far, the power of ideas stand little chance in exceeding the power of the clan in shaping identity, thought, and behavior of Somalis. It is a conclusion that disappointments Somalis who prefer ideas over lineage, or who believe merit to clan identification. But this conclusion, however unpopular or distasteful, derives from observations in the field and perspectives of participants in the fieldwork.

4.3.8 Lessons from the Elections

The local and presidential elections were not without their flaws, as Somaliland officials claim. There were irregularities, most of it inevitable in a country under dictatorship for over thirty years and without census or well-developed voter registration. Some of the irregularities were carried out by dishonest and over-zealous officials. Others were products of inexperience combined with poor logistics, communication, and training. Still, the voting proceeded peaceful and as well as can be expected under the circumstance. Foreign observers, mainly from the United States and the Republic of South Africa, gave high approval to the way the voting was conducted and to the counting of results.

There are important lessons that could be learned from the local and presidential elections in order to avoid repeating the same mistakes and to build on the successes. Mistakes repeated in other elections will no doubt undermine in public confidence with elections, intensify suspicion of foul play, and aggravate trust in government.

The following are some of the limitations and problems noted by the local and international observers:

- The registration process failed prior to and during the voting; hence no data exist except the names of those who voted.

- No pre-election voter education combined with high level of voter illiteracy resulting high errors in voting for the intended candidate.
- Ink did not always work well; evidence of double or multiple voting.
- The officials at the polling stations were of unequal in training, capacities, and commitment.
- Polling stations lacked uniform procedures; some of the officials and representatives of political organizations did not know their job and responsibilities well.
- Some polling stations opened later or closed earlier than scheduled; officials in some polling stations were slow and inefficient; long queues forced some to wait for six hours.
- Poor distribution of polling stations in some areas; some polling stations had either too many or too few voters.
- The police did not have adequate training for crowd control; a few were in polling stations with their guns, breaching the election laws.
- In some areas, underage youth were allowed to vote for lack of proper documents.
- There were no standard procedures for using the dye and assisting the illiterate.
- There were no first aid and no facilities to eat, rest, pray, etc.
- Unresolved problems related to boundaries influenced the outcome; in some instance, ballot boxes were found missing.

The following are some of the successful aspects of the election noted by local and international observers:

- The voters enthusiastic; they exercised self-discipline and maturity; they were patient in long queues for many hours.
- The process was remarkably peaceful and orderly; no intimidation or harassment of voters.
- High turnout for voting; large number of women voters, especially in the afternoon.
- Officials in voting stations seemed committed, even while they worked long hours, many without taking breaks.
- The process of counting ballots in many polling stations seemed transparent when representatives of political organizations were present.
- Weak, lame, or illiterate voters found assistance as needed.
- In general, both local and international observers were welcomed in polling stations.

The question of whether these the first footsteps toward democracy ensure equity is in fact arguable. Majority rule or one-person-one-vote is not the royal road to equity. In fact, both can be tantamount to tyranny of the majority or legalized inequity to minority groups. The Borama Conference has shown that value of consensus in which even the smallest minority can be respectively heard and given their due share of representation, sometimes more of it with spirit of brotherhood and commitment to peace. Most participants warned that, while the experiment on one-person-one-vote should be continued and honed, the value of consensus and lessons of the Borama Conference should not be forgotten.

4.3.9 The Inflation of Sultaans

The Beel System encouraged traditional leaders to directly participate in the political process. Because of it, they no longer were treated archaic, illegitimate, or irrelevant while indirectly they were used by politicians when it suited them. The establishment of the Guurti since 1993 represents a clear admission to the importance and role of the traditional elders. However, the Beel System has unleashed new campaigns of traditional leaders to expand their power and role in society.

The most visible illustration of this is the spate of sultaans that in recent years have emerged in Somaliland. Clans that in the past had one sultaan – a traditional chief – are increasingly breaking up into sub-clans with their separate sultaans. The ambition of some individuals is today channeled in joining the surfeit of sultaans who had mushroomed in recent years, setting in motion the process of clan fission and conflict.

For instance, the Habar Je’lo who had one sultaan in the past have now several some of whom are not content with the title but call themselves boqor – king.

The Dhulbahante who also had one garaad – another term for sultaan – had two in mid-1800s, 13 in 1985, and 14 today – the last selected only a few weeks ago. The Arab who had one now have three, the last selected calling himself boqor.

A dispute between the government and some sultaans got out of hand in 2002. President Egal decided to imprison some of them and kept others in siege when they came to Hargeisa. The incident almost provoked an armed conflict that could have turned into clan conflict, particularly between the Habar Je’lo and the supporters of the government. Fortunately, the dispute was settled by civil society mediators including religious leaders, businessmen, and intellectuals.

Because of the inflation of sultaans, two new problems have emerged in Somaliland. Firstly, the sultaans have come up with calls for a new and exclusive house for them in the parliament. Arguments that the Guurti was designated for traditional leaders including the sultaans do not satisfy them. Because their call for such a house found no social traction, they temporarily ceased their campaign but they did not give up.. The sultaans, old and new, are simply bidding their time, waiting for opportune moment (like time of political transition or armed conflict) when they will exert greater influence to achieve their goal.

Secondly, the traditional system founded on egalitarianism is gradually turning into hierarchical, divisive, and discordant social order. In some instances, the government or the opposition encourages the emergence of a sultaan for narrow political interest, only to find out later that they had created a problem for themselves and for society. Because also traditional titles today have currency (monetarily and socially), each new nominee is trying to outdo the others by name - for instance by calling himself boqor (king) instead of traditional titles like sultaan, garaad, or ugaas. Perhaps, Somaliland will soon be entering a new era were leaders compete over who is “king of kings” – recalling a period of Ethiopian history which ended when Emperor Menelik II finally won the competition and the title Emperor.

The new spate of sultaans it is on the whole dangerous. Firstly, it encourages clan fission which could promote clan conflict. Secondly, it is indicative of weak leadership in government and propensity to fill some vacuum in power. Thirdly, it trivializes a serious political process that started in earnest in 1993, giving new and substantive role to traditional leaders. The surfeit of sultaans may in the end reduce the respect, social value, and power individuals with that title held in society. This too will eliminate key contributors to peace and social harmony to the detriment of Somaliland.

Finally, political debates on shir beelleed (conference of clans) or shir qaraan (national conference) set in motion by some politicians for personal power politics confuse the public. So long as all clan attend, the conference is indeed a national conference. And there can be no national conference in the absence of clans comprising Somaliland. This debate is therefore mostly semantic, not substantive. President Egal used this tactic to browbeat his opponents. If the same debate is used again to exploit public opinion and divide society, Somaliland may return to square one where confusion and confabulation once again breed clan conflict.

4.3.10 Legacy of President Egal

The late President Mohamed Ibrahim Egal was in some respects a godsend for Somaliland in the early 1990s when it was in the midst of anarchy and inter-clan violence. A seasoned politician, he knew how to establish a government where none existed in 1993 when he became President of Somaliland. His long political experience – from the mid-1950s when he played a leading role in the campaign for independence and later as Prime Minister of the Somali Republic – had given him the political skill and savvy for rebuilding government and political institutions in Somaliland. Also a highly articulate and intelligent man, he knew how to rally public support for his ideas and win friends when he wanted to do so. Thus, much credit goes to him for rebuilding Somaliland from the ruins in the ten years of his reign (1993-2002).

On the other hand, President Egal was a man intensely obsessed with personal power and with eliminating his opponents, real or imagined, mostly by political means. Although a civilian leader who encouraged the private sector and independent media, he was also a man with little scruple on amassing money from any source or by any means. However, Egal did not use money for building personal wealth but for buying friends and supporters to secure his way to power and to remain installed in power.

In his early years in politics, he had used his inheritance for campaigns for political office and few would accuse him as a man who had acquired money for the mere accumulation of it. However, his habit of using public funds without hesitation and compunction, as if were his own, had encouraged corruption in his cabinet and in government. He also often looked the other way if his cronies misused public funds so long as they remained loyal to him.

Egal was tolerant of the media so long as they did not attack him. When they did, he had no compunction in turning into a village tyrant. When the media exceeded his threshold of tolerance, he treated its agents in the same shabby way he treated all his opponents. To the anguish of journalist and others, he readily believed, without checking, a rumor he heard from a person close to him or whom he considered loyal, even though the messenger might have invented the rumor to advance a personal interest or relayed it to hurt a foe. In addition, though a usually brilliant tactician, with capacity to forgive and forget, he could be impulsive, vain, and uncompromising, particularly to persons he considered opponents.

Equally significant, the late President manipulated clan politics and developed cronies in ways that made merit and social commitment irrelevant during his reign. Most of his cabinet and major appointments had to show loyalty and compliance to him above competence or knowledge. In addition, Egal made ministries as separate clan fiefdoms. Thus, when he expelled a minister or a director general, he appointed to the same post another equally incapable man from the clan of the one expelled. A succession of such appointments had therefore given the impression that certain ministries or posts are the fiefdoms for some clans.

Lastly, he maintained tight control on the drafting of the Constitution and on the working of the parliament. As a result, certain articles of the Constitution whose wording or ambiguity served his political interest are today severe impediments to the development of democracy. Not a promoter of competence and social commitment in his cabinet, he also encouraged incompetence and social irresponsibility within the parliament. To this day, some of the appointments he made in his cabinet and the parliament remain chronic problems continuing to cause distress even after his death. In short, Egal’s legacy is both a blessing and a curse. He was no doubt the kind of leaders Somaliland needed in its difficult years. However, the clan cleavages, the clan conflicts, and the corruption resulting from his policies, practices, and appointments constitute challenges for years to come.

4.3.11 Rise of Religious Fundamentalism

Since the mid-1970s, Somalis have been experiencing increasing disillusionment with authority, loss of faith in government, and erosion of the moral order giving them existential anchor and social guidance. Islam and prayers became both a shelter and a form of rebellion against the military regime which persecuted citizens in the name of socialism and set out to subdue conscience, religious or otherwise.

The succession of wars since 1977 and continuing to the 1990s had also intensified misery and victimization, pushing people to seek for salvation from faith instead of political leaders or movements continually betraying their promises. In addition, the increasing polarization of Islam countries and the West had brought a new group of religious fundamentalists who scoff at the separation of state and religion and who seek power by any means possible.

On the whole, Somaliland has been spared the kind of religious wars and terrorism flaring up in other parts of the world. Because government has kept anarchy and despair at bay, most religious fundamentalists have focused their efforts in controlling the financial sector, changing school curricula and cultivating young minds, taking over mosques and religious debates, controlling dress and social behavior, particularly of women. Although some of groups who proselytize their brand of Islam (like Wahabism) with external financial support, their role in society had not so far led into a confrontation with the government.

An alarming development which erodes confidence in government both locally and internationally is the systematic murder of foreign expatriates who have come to help Somalilanders in health, education, and demobilization. The murder of a Swiss businessman in Hargiesa two years ago, followed by the murder an Italian lady treating the sick in Borama seven months ago, followed by the killing of two Britons running the rehabilitated secondary couples in Shiekh in November 2003, and in March 2004 the murder of a Kenyan and wounding of a German, both employees of GTZ, had brought rude awareness to the people of Somaliland. The incidents drove home that Somaliland is indeed vulnerable and that its peace is fragile.

Only when five men were captured in the village of Doqoshey by the inhabitants, following the murder of a Kenyan consultant to GTZ, was a solution found for the puzzle which almost unraveled the fragile peace of Somaliland. After the capture of the five men, it became clear that a conspiracy led by religious fundamentalists has been at work and that Somaliland could no longer rest assured that its hard-won peace would sustain without the government beefing up its security measures. At the same time, government is historically known to use such incidents as license to set up excessive security systems and measures which in the end re-instate the cycle of oppression, armed opposition, and disaster Somaliland has come through in the past decades.

In short, the incidents of terrorism occurring in Somaliland in recent months give cause for alarm. So too are the emerging committees and practices of the government which, in the name of ensuring security, violate basic rights of citizens for due process, freedom of expression, and freedom of movement. In particular, as we discuss in the next chapter, worries now center on the Guddiga Nabad- Gelyadda (the Committee on Security) set up unconstitutionally and Public Order No. 21/63 which gives authorities free hand to imprison suspects without due process. Either way, Somaliland seems to be in trouble. When two elephants fight or make love, the grass dies.

4.4 POTENTIAL ESCALATORS OF CONFLICT

- Inequity in clan and gender representation in parliament.
- Inequity in employment opportunities for clans and regions.
- Unequal access to the government, the capital city, and public resources.
- Rampant corruption and misappropriation of public funds.
- Incompetence in the Executive Branch.
- Inequity in government employment.
- Discrimination felt by veterans (both SNM combatants and ex-soldiers).
- Inequity in delineation of district (read clan) boundaries.
- The Proliferation of Sultaans and so-called kings vying for power.
- The emergence of religious radicals using Islam in pursuit of power.

4.5 POTENTIAL DE-ESCALATORS OF CONFLICT

- People jealously guard the hard-won peace, when their frustration is intense.
- The government takes special care in assaulting the property and person of citizens.
- People have come to believe that government is essentially a burden, a nuisance, not solver of life problems; therefore, they do expect least from it so long as it does not directly bother them.
- Since trust and expectation of government is low, its failings are accepted as given.
- Complaints of inequity are a common and acceptable way of letting off steam.
- Since the tyranny and discrimination of the past are the accepted benchmark of misery, present inequities are felt with less passion.
- The anarchy or statelessness of Somalia predisposes Somalilanders to use these as standards on which to evaluate their blessing; but this negative comparison is short-sighted.
- Gradual progress (including the local elections of 2002 and presidential election of 2003) buoying public hope for better things to come in the future. Many Somalilanders identify themselves as “rajo ku-nool” - those who live on hope.”

4.6 SUMMARY

After the collapse of the regime, the Isaaq returned to their destroyed homes, cities, and land with sizzling anger and wish for revenge. Fortunately, the feared conflicts pitting the Isaaq against the non- Isaaq did not take place. Where they did, their scope was limited and their consequences not as disastrous as feared.

When the Isaaq turned on themselves, due to the frustration of years and lethal arms inherited from the war, the SNM leaders had no effective equitable program of governance. During this period, the non- Isaaq (particularly the Gadabursi) found new role in mediating among the Isaaq, in the process becoming key actors and key midwives of a new Somaliland.

The political leaders know well that if clan balance and dialogue cease, the society will regress to conflict and chaos. That is why, for instance, the President makes sure that his cabinet includes as many clans as possible. The downside of this is that the cabinet becomes too large and unwieldy, creating other problems of inefficiency and financial burden. It is a difficult choice – one that requires further thought and experience.

In general, the people of Somaliland are proud of what they have been able to achieve during the past ten years with little international assistance. They restored peace and formed a government that by African standards is exemplar. Lessons can be learned from the Somaliland experience by those who seek to find problems to Somalia.

The Beel system, a hybrid of tradition and modernity, is a major step forward in experimentation and inventiveness that have been undermined by local elite that, soon after independence, wanted to develop a replica of Western Europe but could not. The military regime, aping socialist countries, adopted the rhetoric of revolution but had shown its poverty in substance and practice.

Following its collapse, society had to either save itself or to perish. On the precipice of disaster, it chose to fall back on its local resources and creativity. The result was the Beel system which saved it from impending disaster.

However, the Beel system is not a panacea. It has its limitations. For instance, it is cumbersome and inefficient. It values inclusiveness over merit and competence. In addition, the traditional leaders who have come to the limelight of politics know little about the demands of a contemporary state. They are as much valuable to society as they are a burden to it.

The Beel system was supposed to be a transitional structure. The emergence of political parties was supposed to reduce the criterion of clan and to build a government based on diversity, peaceful competition, and merit. Yet the political parties have shown that they too are unable to free themselves from the clutches and crutches of clan.

Lastly, the problems of inequity and injustice that pushed society to war have not been adequately resolved. Complaints are rife in different sectors. Those who live outside Hargeisa feel neglected and discriminated against. So do former ex-combatants, rural communities, women, and minorities. In short, though Somaliland has come a long way from the tyranny of the military regime and the anarchy following its collapse, it still has a long way to go to build an enduring system of government, credible to its people and the international community. Governance and political institutions of Somaliland are a mixture of the good and the bad because its leaders particularly and the society generally present both in high quotient.

The bad aspects can not be eliminated, any more than the good alone cultivated. Peace and development have come from a careful balance of the two tendencies. In a nascent and fragile society like Somaliland, increment of one over the other could either push society forward toward democracy and development, or thrust it to yet another disaster. The quality of leaders is thus as critical as patience of the public.

Chapter 5: EQUITY OF LAW AND JUDICIAL SYSTEM

5.1 WHY WE SELECTED THIS ISSUE?

We selected this issue because firstly the perception and reality of inequity in society has been a primary cause for armed conflict. Secondly, the majority of people in Somaliland took up arms against the regime of Mohamed Siyaad Barre because equity of law and the judicial system had been severely violated and peaceful methods of redress to their grievance had failed. We wanted to see how far law enforcement and justice systems have come since 1991 when Somaliland reclaimed its independence.

5.2 BACKGROUND

After the collapse of the military regime in 1991, different regions of Somalia reverted to varying traditions of law enforcement and legal systems. In Somaliland, the police and the judiciary had to be recreated from scratch. Since 1993 there has been steady progress in re-establishing the foundation of law enforcement and the judicial system including the development of legal codes, courts, and jails. The history of how law enforcement and the judicial system were re-established in Somaliland sets a context for understanding the problems of inequity in the law and the judicial system.

5.2.1 The Police Before 1991

When the occupation of Somaliland coast by Britain started in earnest in 1884, shortly after the Egyptians had evacuated Berbera, Langton P. Walsh had established a police force comprising of 100 men whom he trained in drills and marksmanship. This miniscule force operated effectively because firstly the population took seriously agreements of “protection” their elders had signed with the British and secondly because the British used effectively the policy of divide-and-rule.26

The war of the Dervishes led by Mohamed Abdulle Hassan intensified the decision of Britain to hold on to the Protectorate and increase its forces. Following pacification, Britain invested little in Somaliland and continued indirect rule using elders and minimum external force. When in1959 the Somaliland Police Force established, it comprised 24 gazetted officers of whom only 10 were Somalilanders. Soon after, the police training school at Mandhera was constructed to train new recruits.

In 1960, the police in Somaliland and Somalia were integrated. The police traditions and procedures each force inherited from its colonial rulers – one British, the other Italian – did not conform and hence confusion followed until the National Police Force found technical assistance from the former West Germany. From 1960-169, the civilian administrations politicized the police and infected it with its clan competition and cleavages. When the police interfered in elections marred by rigged ballots, the respect and confidence it enjoyed had diminished.

After the military coup of 1969, the National Police Force found technical and financial assistance from the former East Germany. The politicization of the police intensified as it became the bulwark of the regime using arbitrary detention and torture against persons considered “anti-revolutionary” and hence opponent of the regime. Growing into a formidable force, the police did its part in holding the lid on citizens until the regime fell on January 26, 1991.

5.2.2 The Judicial System Before 1992

In pre-colonial Somaliland, customary law (xeer) was used alongside Islamic Shari’a (of the Shafi’i school). Clan elders and experts in Shari’a law (the qaadis and sheikhs) applied the laws in an informal manner. In matters concening marriage, divorce and inheritance rights, Shari’a was usually disregarded in favour of xeer.27

The British colonial administration introduced an additional body of codified law and a judicial system based on British Common and Statute Law and the Indian Penal Code. In addition, the British established traditional (Akil’s) courts and, subsequently, the Qaadi’s courts to apply customary law, while Shari’a law continued to be applied in domestic matters.

At independence in 1960, when British Somaliland and Italian Somalia were united, four distinct legal traditions – British Common Law, Italian (Continental) law, Islamic Shari’a, and Somali customary law – were in simultaneous operation. These four legal systems were partially integrated by the passage of a “Law on the Organization of the Judiciary” by the National Assembly of Somalia in 1962. According to this legislation, the civil and penal codes and commercial law were to be based on Italian law, whereas the criminal procedure code was to be based on Anglo-Indian law. In Somaliland, however, the lower courts continued to practice British law until 1977 because judges were most conversant with this system. At the same time, Islamic Shari’a continued to apply in family and civil matters, while customary law (sanctioned by civil courts) was retained for optional application in such matters as land tenure, water and grazing rights, and the payment of diya. In parts of the country, particularly rural areas, where state law did not reach, customary law was predominant.

The military regime that seized power in 1969 suspended the Constitution of 1961, assigning all legislative, executive, and judicial powers to the Supreme Revolutionary Council. In 1973, the regime introduced a unified civil code. Its provisions pertaining to inheritance, personal contracts and water grazing rights sharply curtailed both the Shari’a and Somali customary law.

In particular, the new civil code altered the customary system diya payment as compensation for death or injury, in which responsibility was collectively born