Somaliland declared itself an independent state in 1991, after the demise of the dictatorial rule of Somalia’s Siyaad Barre. Somaliland, functioning as a ‘de facto’ state, has managed to piece together a complex system of governance that is based on both the precepts of democracy and traditional clan-based forms of governance.⁽²⁾ In building Somaliland and functioning under this hybrid system, the de facto state has achieved what only a handful of countries in Sub-Saharan Africa have achieved – a degree of stability and, so far, a peaceful process of democratisation.

There seems to be a consensus among the people of Somaliland that the only way that the region can be recognised internationally as a nation state and ensure development is to go through a democratic process. The successful staging of six elections in the last 10 years has evidenced Somalilanders’ commitment to building a new state and to the democratisation process. The elections have been a strong indication of the polity’s commitment to peace and stability in the region, and their ability to manage their own affairs. This paper explores the role of elections in the de facto state and the implications that they have for Somaliland’s status as an independent nation and for the future of democracy in the country and the region.

A de facto state

The creation of the ‘Republic of Somaliland’ was a direct result of the civil war in Somalia that began in 1982 when resistance to Barre’s regime was first mounted by the Somali National Movement (SNM) in the northern cities of Hargeisa and Burao.⁽³⁾ After the fall of Barre’s regime, Somalia’s central government disintegrated and chaos ruled as rival clan-based militias battled for control over the different regions of Somalia. The balkanization of Somalia along clan lines resulted in the establishment of precarious administrations, such as Puntland, Somaliland, Jubbaland, Benadirland and Hiranland. Of these self proclaimed independent regions, Somaliland, in north-eastern Somalia, has endured as a self proclaimed independent state.⁽⁴⁾

On 18 May 1991, the Republic of Somaliland was created when the leaders of the SNM and the elders of the northern Somali clans united and revoked the 1960 Act of Union.⁽⁵⁾ The 1960 Act of Union “joined the former colonial territories of Italian Somalia and the British Somaliland Protectorate into the Somali Republic.”⁽⁶⁾ The SNM and the northern clan leaders stated that the revoking of the Act was “not an act of secession but rather a voluntary dissolution of a union of two sovereign states.”⁽⁷⁾

As in the other semi-autonomous regions that had emerged, the first couple of years of Somaliland’s ‘independence’ were tumultuous and marked by inter-clan strife and threats of civil war. However, political stability in the region was achieved through the 1993 Borama conference. The conference marked an important shift for Somaliland as out of the conference came the peaceful transfer of power from the SNM government to a civilian government headed by Mohamed Haji Ibrahim Egal.⁽⁸⁾ The emergent political system was a combination of both indigenous forms of social and political organisations and Western-style institutions of government.⁽⁹⁾ This hybrid system resembles the British House of Lords ⁽¹⁰⁾ in that there is an executive president; an upper house of parliament, known as the Guurti, compromising traditional elders; and a lower house of representatives, called the Golaha Wakillada, whose members are nominated on a clan basis by an electoral college of elders.⁽¹¹⁾ Since its inception, Somaliland has been able to establish a government, provide protection to its population, exercise control over its borders, form an army and adopt other symbols of statehood, such as having its own currency, passport, vehicle license plates and taxes.

Essentially, Somaliland therefore functions as a state, but remains unrecognised by the international community. As a de facto state, Somaliland has “embarked on a home-grown process of ‘bottom-up’ reconciliation and state-building, largely escaping the pressures of foreign intervention.”⁽¹¹⁾ This has served Somaliland well, because, unlike the southern regions of the failed Somalia, which are still in the grips of violence and instability, Somaliland has achieved a semblance of stability and peace. However, as an unrecognised state, Somaliland cannot enjoy the full benefits of statehood. Somaliland remains poorly funded and its continued classification as part of Somalia has also handicapped economic development and trade, as the international community is reluctant to become involved in an area that is located within a failed state and still regarded as a war zone. For the leaders of Somaliland, proving to the international community that Somaliland was, in fact, its own independent state required that the region undergo further democratisation by subjecting all its political institutions to popular vote.

Democracy and state-building through elections

Elections have played an integral role in the process of democratisation and state-building in Somaliland. This process has been enabled by the public’s desire to avoid a return to conflict, the need to ensure sustainable development in the region and the small accompanying urge to win international recognition as a nation state. The democratic evolution and state-building process has occurred in two phases. The first phase involved the introduction and institutionalisation of a constitutional order, and the second phase involved the continued transformation and strengthening of governmental bodies within the region. The common mechanism used throughout the two phases has been elections. The successful staging of six elections ⁽¹²⁾ over the past 13 years has important implications for Somaliland in terms of its democratic and de facto state status.  For the purposes of this paper, the 2001 constitutional referendum, the 2010 presidential election and the 2012 local council elections best illustrate the abovementioned phases of Somaliland’s democratic evolution and state-building process.

Somaliland held its first constitutional referendum in 2001. The referendum was to serve multiple purposes: it would finalise the promulgation of the constitution of Somaliland, ease the anxiety of changing Somaliland’s clan-based political system to a multi-party democratic system, introduce and institutionalise constitutional order in Somaliland’s system of governance, and counter international initiatives (the Puntland State of Somalia in 1998 and the Transnational National Government of Somalia in 2000) to reconstitute Somalia to a functioning state, which threatened Somaliland’s self-proclaimed independence.

On 31 May 2001, a draft constitution reaffirming Somaliland’s independence was approved by 97% of the people.⁽¹³⁾ The adoption of this constitution mandated universal suffrage, subjected all political bodies to regular elections, and restricted the number of political parties to participate in elections to three (the United Democratic People’s Party (UDUB), Kulmiye (the Unity Party) and the Justice and Welfare Party (UCID) as determined in the 2002 local elections).⁽¹⁴⁾ This was the first step to furthering democracy in the country and to establishing Somaliland as an independent state. The constitutional referendum was important, because it highlighted the need to acknowledge the internal political processes that were occurring in Somaliland that were unique to Somaliland and set Somaliland apart from the other self-proclaimed independent states of Somalia.

After three subsequent elections (the 2002 local council elections, the first presidential election, held in 2003 and the 2005 parliamentary election), certain patterns of voting became apparent. While the constitution had established a restricted multi-party democratic system, Somalilanders were still voting according to their affiliation to a certain clan, resulting in a political monopoly by the UDUB. Moreover, emergent voting patterns in the local council elections highlighted the differing levels of development and urbanisation of the different areas of the region. The elections established the legitimate authority of local leaders in the various regions of Somaliland, reinforced the legitimacy and progression of its political institutions, and consolidated Somaliland’s boundaries. The elections also highlighted growing tensions regarding the established electoral laws and electoral management. These challenges were addressed by the continued adjustment of political structures and negotiation of electoral laws, which continued to move Somaliland further along its democratisation and state-consolidation process. Elections had effectively become the “integral ingredient in establishing an inclusive system of representation...and an essential component of internal peace and security”⁽¹⁵⁾ for Somaliland.

The 2010 presidential election was originally scheduled to be held in 2008, but was postponed due to a number of issues concerning electoral laws and management. Amidst a genuine concern of a waning commitment to the electoral process, there was, however, a “certain sanguine feeling sometimes that it is better to get things right than to meet the timetable.”⁽¹⁶⁾ The run-up to the election was fraught with tensions among political parties, external threats of violence by Al Shabaab in attempts to discourage Somalilanders from voting, and the continued struggle to ensure adequate funding was available to conduct the elections.⁽¹⁷⁾ However, on 26 June 2010, despite all challenges, Somaliland held its second presidential election. This election was important as it heralded the second phase of democratisation in the region.⁽¹⁸⁾ Dahir Riyale Kahin, president of Somaliland since 2003, handed power peacefully to his successor Ahmed Mohamed Mohamoud Silanyo. This event “marked both change and continuity – a change of government (from the UDUB party to Kulmiye) as well as president”⁽¹⁹⁾ and an indication of the continued commitment to adhering to and promoting constitutional democracy in the region.

Local council elections took place on 28 November 2012. These elections highlighted the issue of Somaliland’s de facto status and provided insight into key themes of citizenship, participation and democracy.⁽²⁰⁾ The purpose of these elections was to elect individual councillors for the various districts in the region and select the top three political parties that would be eligible to contest all other elections for the next decade. These elections were important because, for the first time, civil society representatives from south-central Somalia and Puntland learned from Somaliland elections, with a view to build a collective institutional understanding of election management amongst the different Somali actors.⁽²¹⁾ Despite reports of violence throughout this electoral process,⁽²²⁾ international observers regarded the elections as free, fair and credible. They provided the platform through which clan kinship bonds were tested as the old and new political associations campaigned for support. It was seen that campaigning was about more than just allegiance to a particular clan; it was also about  educating people about the electoral process, the importance of education and service delivery and the continual need to increase citizen participation (with a particular focus on women). In the end, Kulmiye, UCID and Wadani (a new political association) became the new political parties that would be eligible to contest future elections.

While it can be accepted that elections have a vital role in Somaliland, one would still have to answer the question of whether elections, and the continued commitment to staging elections, will be enough to ensure that Somaliland continues safely on its democratic path. In this regard, it is suggested that Somaliland’s political leaders need to address key vulnerabilities of the electoral process and actively engage with the international community regarding Somaliland’s independent status.

Beyond elections

It is well established that “elections are a defining characteristic of democracy, and thus form an integral part of the democratisation process.”⁽²³⁾ Elections in Somaliland have proven effective ‘checks and balances’ for the elected government and ensured a sense of freedom and security from both internal and external political pressures. However, elections in Somaliland have not been without their challenges. Issues pertaining to voter registration,⁽²⁴⁾ the inclusion of women, an increase in electoral violence,⁽²⁵⁾ and the reformation of ambiguous electoral laws, still need to be addressed. It is in addressing these issues that elections in Somaliland will continue to play a vital role in establishing Somaliland as an independent democratic state.

In addressing the defects of Somaliland’s electoral process, clear agendas and operating principles must be formulated to create an inclusive and lasting democratic culture.⁽²⁶⁾ Suggested improvements include the following:⁽²⁷⁾

• the introduction of an unambiguous voter register system in addition to identity cards,
• the tightening of electoral legal frameworks to deal with the contestation of electoral results. This would require that the judicial system be strengthened to deal with warranted complaints coupled with the establishment of a special electoral dispute resolution court,
• the implementation of sustained gender-sensitive civic education programmes,  and
• the investment by electoral management bodies, consisting of the National Electoral Commission (NEC) the Committee for the Registration of Political Associations and the Approval of National Parties (RAC), in strategic long-term and operational planning, covering boundary delimitation consultations, research and voter education.

Realisation of the above suggestions will ensure that the elections in Somaliland enhance public participation and keep the electoral process impartial and transparent. In a region such as Somaliland, which is still in its early stages of democratisation, elections must continually be held with integrity to ensure their credibility, not only to the Somalilanders, but also to the international community. An unsettling trend in conflict-ridden countries is that they are able to hold a series of successful elections for a time, but because of the inability of the leadership to evolve and adjust to the different pressures that the countries face, they spiral back into conflict. In these instances elections become a mere veneer of democracy and elected governments lose their legitimacy. The above suggestions target the main challenge for Somaliland elections, which is to continually adjust and build supportive electoral institutions that promote inclusivity, norms of multiparty competition and division of power, which bolster democracy as a mutual security system among political contenders and ensure that elections resolve conflict, rather than exacerbate it.⁽²⁸⁾  It should be noted in this regard that “elections themselves will not develop economies, create governance or guarantee peace, but the continued commitment to improve elections can be a catalytic step towards realising democracy’s transformative potential.”⁽²⁹⁾

While elections have played an integral part in Somaliland’s democratisation and state-building processes, to the international community elections have only been able to ensure a minimal sense of political freedom. The debate over whether Somaliland will ever be recognised as an independent state lies with the international community. In terms of the Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States,⁽³⁰⁾ Somaliland fulfils the broad criteria of statehood – there is a permanent population, a defined territory, a government, and the capacity to enter into relations with other states.⁽³¹⁾  However, the recognition of states is not governed solely by international law or facts on the ground, but by “a complex calculus of factors that include....the self-interest of other states, politics, personality, and strategic considerations – including the management or prevention of conflict.”⁽³²⁾ The most important factor is that statehood requires recognition by other states. Recognition of Somaliland as an independent state is not going to happen in the near future, because there is still the internationally accepted notion that Somalia can be unified. This has resulted in elections in Somaliland occurring in a political isolation. In order for Somaliland to enjoy the full benefits of its achievements its political leaders need to gain international support.

Concluding remarks

In 1991, Somaliland declared itself an independent state and embarked on a journey of political and social reconstruction to rebuild its institutions and people’s lives following the civil war in Somalia.⁽³³⁾ This process has involved engaging in elections to establish a democratic system of governance, to ensure peace within the region and  independence from Somalia. With each election, Somaliland increasingly establishes itself as a territorially defined state, further along the path to democracy than other regions within failed Somalia and its neighbouring countries. Somaliland and its elections illustrate the transformative effect that elections can have in countries that have been characterised by civil wars, unstable governments and state fragmentation.

However, as Somaliland’s democracy matures, leadership and civil society must work together to address the vulnerabilities within Somaliland’s electoral system.  As with any maturing democracy, the measure of a country’s democracy will depend on how the elected institutions function and are perceived by the public, competing parties and the international community.

Elections in Somaliland have highlighted the need to acknowledge the relative success of internal political processes that are occurring in the region while the rest of the world debates the recognition of Somaliland as an independent state. For the time being, the persistent electoral demand for better governance will see Somaliland continue to assert itself as an independent state. The continued successful staging of elections and the commitment to having a peaceful democratic process presents a challenge for those in favour of restoring Somalia to a ‘functioning state’ as the term is traditionally understood, but Somaliland also presents a unique experience which provides an alternative to traditional political thought about nation state building, sovereignty and international law. The manner in which Somaliland has undergone its process of democratisation and state-building through elections, without inflexible adherence to timetables, and without imposing peace from above or outside, should serve as encouragement to the rest of the region to support peace-building and political reconstruction processes that occur from within.

Written by Kutloano Tshabalala ⁽¹⁾

NOTES:

(1) Kutloano Tshabalala is a researcher with a special interest in international diplomacy, security and socio-economic development. Contact Kutloano  through Consultancy Africa Intelligence's Election and Democracy Unit ( election.democracy@consultancyafrica.com). Edited by Liezl Stretton.
(2) Walls, M. and Kibble, S., 2010. Beyond polarity: Negotiating a hybrid state in Somaliland. Africa Spectrum, 45(1), pp. 31-51.
(3) ’Somaliland election review report’, Somaliland Non-State Actors Forum (SONASAF), March 2011, http://www.sonsaf.org.
(4) Arieff, A., 2008. De facto statehood? The strange case of Somaliland. Yale Journal of International Affairs, 3(2), pp. 60-79.
(5) Abokor, A.Y., et al., ‘Further steps to democracy: The Somaliland parliamentary elections 2005’, Progressio report, September 2006, http://www.progressio.org.uk.
(6) Ibid.
(7) Arieff, A., 2008. De facto statehood? The strange case of Somaliland. Yale Journal of International Affairs, 3(2), pp. 60-79.
(8) Abokor, A.Y., et al., ‘Further steps to democracy: The Somaliland parliamentary elections 2005’, Progressio report, September 2006, http://www.progressio.org.uk.
(9) Ibid.
(10) Arieff, A., 2008. De facto statehood? The strange case of Somaliland. Yale Journal of International Affairs, 3(2), pp. 60-79.
(11) Walls, M. and Kibble, S., 2010. Beyond polarity: Negotiating a hybrid state in Somaliland. Africa Spectrum,45(1), pp. 31-51.
(12) In the past 13 years, Somaliland has successfully staged six elections – constitutional referendum in 2001, municipal elections in 2002, first presidential election in 2003, legislative election in 2005, second presidential election in 2010 and local council elections in 2012.
(13) Arieff, A., 2008. De facto statehood? The strange case of Somaliland. Yale Journal of International Affairs, 3(2), pp. 60-79.
(14) Abokor, A.Y., et al., ‘Further steps to democracy: The Somaliland parliamentary elections 2005’, Progressio report, September 2006, http://www.progressio.org.uk.
(15) Paice, E., ‘Somaliland - why elections matter’, Somaliland Sun, 10 May 2013, http://somalilandsun.com.
(16) Kibble, S. and Walls, M., ‘Preparing for local elections in Somaliland: Plans, challenges and progress’, Progressio Report, August 2012, http://www.progressio.org.uk.
(17) Kibble, S. and Walls, M., ‘Somaliland: Change and continuity - report by election observers on the June 2010 presidential elections in Somaliland’, Progressio report, May 2011, http://www.progressio.org.uk.
(18) ’Somaliland election review report’, Somaliland Non-State Actors Forum (SONASAF), March 2011, http://www.sonsaf.org.
(19) Kibble, S. and Walls, M., ‘Somaliland: Change and continuity - Report by election observers on the June 2010 presidential elections in Somaliland’, Progressio report, May 2011, http://www.progressio.org.uk.
(20) Butcher, S., ‘Somaliland: An international observer reminisces 2012 council elections’, Somaliland Sun, 1 June 2013, http://somalilandsun.com.
(21) ‘International observation of elections in Somaliland’, The Bartlett Development Planning Unit, UCL, 10 December 2012, http://www.bartlett.ucl.ac.uk.
(22) Forero, C., et al., ‘Elections and conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa 2013: Somaliland, Cote D’Ivoire and Kenya’, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs Graduate Policy Workshop, February 2013, http://wws.princeton.edu.
(23) Ndulo, M. and Lulo, S., 2010. Free and fair elections, violence and conflict. Harvard International Law Journal Online, 51, pp. 155-171, http://www.harvardilj.org.
(24) Fadal, M., ‘Somaliland: Credible voter registration is critical for salvaging the integrity of Somaliland elections’, Somalilandpress, April 2013, http://somalilandpress.com.
(25) Forero, C. et al, ‘Elections and conflict in Sub-Saharan Africa 2013: Somaliland, Cote D’Ivoire and Kenya’, Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs Graduate Policy Workshop, February 2013, http://wws.princeton.edu.
(26) Ali, Y. and Makokha, J., ‘Somalilanders speak: Lessons from the November 2012 local elections’, Safeworld, April 2013, http://www.somalilandlaw.com.
(27) Ibid.
(28) ‘Deeping democracy: A strategy for improving the integrity of elections worldwide’, Report of the Global Commission on Elections, Democracy and Security, September 2012, http://www.global-commission.org.
(29) Ibid.
(30) ‘Convention on the Rights and Duties of States’, 1933, Montevideo: International Conference of American States.
(31) It should be noted in this regard that while the Montevideo convention is regarded as only binding on states in the Western hemisphere, its principles are considered widely acceptable as reflecting customary international law that is applicable to all countries in the world.
(32) ‘Somaliland: Time for African Union leadership’, International Crisis Group, 2006, http://www.crisisgroup.org.
(33) Ali, Y. and Makokha, J., ‘Somalilanders speak: Lessons from the November 2012 local elections’, Safeworld, April 2013, http://www.somalilandlaw.com.