Enhancing federal inter-governmental relations and state building in Somalia

The past decade has seen renewed interest in federalism as a solution to political problems. A significant body of research exists on the theory and application of federalism, particularly in the context of post-conflict power-sharing. Intergovernmental relations (IGR), defined as interactions and coordination between governmental entities, are crucial for successful federal systems. Federalism is considered the ideal solution for Somalia, aiming to establish a power-sharing agreement among Somali clans and resolve the nation's political challenges. However, the implementation of federalism in Somalia has faced significant challenges, resulting in a persistent state of political instability. Existing literature lacks detailed analysis of IGRs and their role in civic state building in Somalia. This study addresses this gap by investigating the nature of IGRs between the federal government and member states and their impact on civic state building. The central research question is: How has federal-state intergovernmental relation hampered civic state building in Somalia? This study contributes to the existing literature on federalism by focusing on Somalia's unique context and its impact on power-sharing, a crucial element for creating a functional state. The study also addresses the critical question of how constitutions should regulate intergovernmental interaction to foster cooperation and negotiation.

The study reviews the concepts of federal-state intergovernmental relations and civic state building. It explores both vertical (federal-state) and horizontal (inter-state) IGR interactions, highlighting the challenges of establishing effective IGRs, illustrated by examples such as Italy and Ethiopia. Two models of IGRs are discussed: the dual/competitive model, characterized by inherent power struggles between levels of government; and the cooperative/executive model, emphasizing collaboration and shared responsibility. The study then analyzes Somalia's federal system, highlighting its conflictual IGRs despite constitutional provisions promoting cooperation. The lack of clarity regarding local government roles and the controversial extent of devolution exacerbate these challenges. The review also covers civic state-building, exploring the concept of civic identity and its various dimensions. It examines the dichotomy between ethnic and civic identity, the primordial versus modernist schools of thought, and the complexities of state formation in post-colonial African nations. The study discusses the traditional approach to state-building in Africa, comparing it with Somalia’s unique context, emphasizing the dominance of clan-based structures over centralized state institutions and the challenges of imposed top-down state-building approaches.

A qualitative research design was employed to understand how federal-state IGRs affect civic state building in Somalia. Qualitative methods are well-suited to explore individuals' perceptions and interpretations of events. Data were collected through in-depth interviews, interview schedules, and guided questionnaires. Twenty-seven respondents were interviewed, including policymakers, academics, civil servants, traditional elders, religious scholars, women’s groups, and youth groups, representing diverse backgrounds and locations across Somalia. A purposive sampling technique was used to select individuals with direct or indirect involvement in or experience with federal-state IGRs. The sample included a mix of men and women, representing various age groups, socio-economic backgrounds, and educational levels. Participants were chosen through existing contacts and snowball sampling, ensuring representativeness. The researchers followed ethical principles, obtaining informed consent and protecting participants' anonymity.

The study revealed that intergovernmental relations in Somalia are characterized by significant tensions and conflicts. Respondents identified several key issues: inadequate constitutional provisions for power division between federal and state institutions leading to conflicts between the president and prime minister; conflicting constitutions and incompatible councils at the federal and state levels; lack of an effective upper house to mediate disputes; minimal existing IGR laws often ignored or not enforced; lack of an agreed-upon power-sharing model; conflicts of interest and lack of an independent judiciary; lack of inclusivity in the constitutional development process; and the influence of clan loyalties over national interests. The compromised upper house was identified as a significant weakness, lacking sufficient provisions, representing the state president rather than the state itself, and suffering from poor inter-house relationships. The lack of an effective power-sharing mechanism was highlighted; many believed that power relations are determined by personal relationships instead of institutional frameworks. The role of elites was also explored, noting how their actions are often dictated by pressures from clans, leading to a lack of elite solidarity and promoting the formation of dysfunctional political associations. There was no consensus on the ideal model of IGRs (competitive or cooperative), with some advocating for cooperation in political spheres and competition in service delivery. A significant obstacle is the group referred to as "government owners", who feel entitled to special privileges due to their perceived role in establishing the government. Respondents' understanding of a "civic state" highlighted the need for a non-militarily occupied state that is accountable, collects taxes effectively, provides services, and empowers its citizens. The lack of nationalism was linked to experiences of poor governance, the emphasis on revolution rather than nation-building during the military regime, and resentment toward taxation and state control. The study also stressed the need to incorporate indigenous approaches to state building, aligning with Somali culture, religion, and customs. The neglect of indigenous approaches alongside the reliance on foreign and unsuitable federal models was considered crucial. The dominance of clan politics and the two-family duopoly system was strongly criticized for hindering national unity and progress. The main obstacles to establishing a civic state were identified as clan-based federalism, mistrust among clans, the presence of war criminals within the system, recovery from civil war, dependence on international aid, and excessive clan politics.

The study's findings directly address the research question by demonstrating how flawed IGRs hamper civic state-building in Somalia. The constitutional limitations, lack of institutional capacity, and influence of clan politics significantly undermine efforts to build a functional and inclusive state. The lack of an effective power-sharing model leads to conflicts and hinders cooperation. The findings highlight the need for a comprehensive approach that addresses not only the formal institutional arrangements but also the underlying social and political dynamics. The study demonstrates the limitations of imposing foreign models of governance without considering Somalia's unique cultural, religious, and political context. The emphasis on indigenous approaches to state-building is crucial for fostering ownership and national unity. The research emphasizes the importance of strengthening institutional capacity, promoting inclusivity in governance, and empowering citizens.

This study reveals the weakness of Somalia's current legal framework supporting federalism, highlighting insufficient institutional and constitutional provisions and the ineffective enforcement of IGR regulations. These flaws significantly hinder the federal government's operation, hampering cooperation and leading to inefficiencies. The lack of an agreed-upon model for IGRs and power-sharing further obstructs progress. The findings underscore the importance of indigenous state-building approaches. The main obstacles to a civic state include clan-based federalism, mistrust, and lingering influence of war criminals. Future research should focus on testing these findings in different contexts, exploring the effects of IGRs on political, economic, and security development in Somalia, and comparing the Somali experience with other fragile states.

The study's reliance on qualitative data limits the generalizability of the findings. The sample size, although diverse, might not fully represent all perspectives within Somalia's complex political landscape. Future research could benefit from incorporating quantitative data to complement the qualitative findings and further strengthen the study's generalizability. The study's focus on Somalia also limits its direct applicability to other contexts. While the lessons learned can inform state-building efforts elsewhere, each context requires a tailored approach.