Caaqil News - Since Somalia adopted a system of indirect democracy based on clan-based power sharing, political opposition has emerged as a major force shaping governance. However, the nature and effectiveness of opposition movements have varied significantly depending on who holds the presidency. This report explores the key differences between the opposition during former President Mohamed Abdullahi Farmaajo’s term (2017–2022) and the opposition under current President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud (2022–present), focusing on political structure, influence, public messaging, and support from international partners.
1. Organizational Structure of the Opposition: Unity vs. Fragmentation
During Farmaajo’s Term:
The opposition movement during Farmaajo’s presidency was remarkably unified, composed of heavyweight political figures such as former Presidents Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, Abdirahman Abdishakur Warsame, and other notable actors. These leaders formed a strong coalition known as the Council of Presidential Candidates (or Midowga Musharaxiinta), which operated with a shared political strategy and common objectives. Their primary agenda was to challenge what they viewed as Farmaajo’s authoritarian tendencies, including his attempts to centralize power and extend his term beyond constitutional limits.
This opposition was not only well-organized but also disciplined. Its leaders coordinated press briefings, organized protests, and engaged in effective lobbying both domestically and internationally. Their united front was key to applying pressure on Farmaajo’s administration and shaping public discourse.
Under Hassan Sheikh’s Presidency:
In contrast, the opposition under President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud is fragmented, loosely coordinated, and lacks a central body that articulates a coherent vision or agenda. While figures like Abdirahman Abdishakur and a few other former allies of Hassan Sheikh have become increasingly critical of his administration, the opposition does not possess the same institutional framework or unity of purpose as seen during Farmaajo’s term.
There is no functioning coalition akin to the “Council of Presidential Candidates.” As a result, opposition voices today are often isolated, issue-specific, and reactive rather than proactive. This disorganization has limited their ability to influence policy or shape national debates in a meaningful way.
2. Political Influence and Leverage: Pressure vs. Passivity
Farmaajo Era:
The opposition during Farmaajo’s term was a force to be reckoned with. It had significant domestic influence and international backing. One of the most notable examples of their political leverage was the successful campaign against the extension of Farmaajo’s presidential term in 2021. After Parliament controversially voted to extend Farmaajo’s term by two years, the opposition mounted a series of public demonstrations and worked closely with international partners such as the United Nations, African Union, and European Union to reverse the decision.
The pressure eventually forced Farmaajo to withdraw the extension plan and return to negotiations based on the September 17 agreement. This incident is a clear testament to how influential and well-organized the opposition was during that period.
Hassan Sheikh Era:
The opposition during Hassan Sheikh’s presidency has yet to demonstrate any comparable level of political clout. While criticisms have been made—especially regarding security setbacks, regional federalism disputes, and allegations of centralized decision-making—there has been no effective campaign capable of altering or halting government actions.
The government’s recent diplomatic expansions, constitutional amendments, and military campaigns against Al-Shabaab have moved forward largely without coordinated resistance from opposition figures. This suggests a political environment in which the current opposition is struggling to assert itself.
3. International Engagement: Strong Channels vs. Weak Communication
Under Farmaajo:
The opposition maintained strong communication lines with the international community. Key opposition leaders engaged in regular dialogue with international embassies and multilateral organizations. These connections proved essential during the 2020–2021 electoral crisis, when opposition leaders succeeded in persuading foreign stakeholders to apply pressure on Farmaajo’s administration.
Many international actors publicly sided with the opposition's demand for credible, timely elections and warned against unconstitutional extensions. This external support amplified the opposition’s message and made it harder for Farmaajo’s administration to act unilaterally.
Under Hassan Sheikh:
In contrast, the current opposition has a minimal international profile. There is little evidence of systematic engagement with diplomatic missions or regional organizations. Consequently, international actors have generally viewed President Hassan Sheikh’s administration as a stabilizing force rather than a regime to be challenged or balanced.
This passive approach has deprived the opposition of an important platform to project their concerns, attract legitimacy, or seek international mediation. Without diplomatic outreach, their ability to build pressure and legitimacy remains weak.
4. Messaging and Public Mobilization: Clear Narrative vs. Scattered Voices
During Farmaajo:
The opposition’s communication strategy was both assertive and coherent. Through joint press conferences, open letters, and organized demonstrations, they communicated a consistent narrative: Farmaajo’s government was undermining Somalia’s fragile democracy. This message resonated with large segments of the public, especially in Mogadishu, where there was significant mobilization around issues of term limits and press freedom.
Public rallies held in the capital city often turned into political spectacles, drawing national and international attention. The opposition leveraged social media and independent media outlets to amplify their voices and raise awareness among the general population.
Under Hassan Sheikh:
In comparison, today’s opposition is less visible and less effective in shaping public opinion. There are no organized rallies, no joint public addresses, and no consistent messaging. Criticism of the current administration tends to come in fragmented soundbites through social media or in interviews rather than in coordinated campaigns.
This lack of cohesive messaging makes it difficult for the public to understand what the opposition stands for or what alternative they are offering. As a result, their impact on political discourse and public sentiment is limited.
5. Security and State Pressure: Repression vs. Tolerance
Under Farmaajo:
Opposition leaders during Farmaajo’s term often faced state repression. Security agencies like the National Intelligence and Security Agency (NISA) and the Somali Police Force were accused of targeting opposition figures, disrupting protests, and curbing press freedoms. In some cases, opposition politicians were arrested or harassed.
This repression ironically strengthened the opposition, as it garnered public sympathy and international condemnation. The narrative of victimization allowed the opposition to present themselves as defenders of democracy and constitutionalism.
Under Hassan Sheikh:
The current administration has not pursued such overt crackdowns on opposition figures. Most opposition politicians operate freely, criticize the government, and run their campaigns without state interference. This relatively open political space, however, has not translated into increased political activity or cohesion within the opposition.
While some have praised the Hassan Sheikh administration for maintaining political tolerance, others argue that the lack of opposition mobilization is more a symptom of internal weakness than government restraint.
6. Socio-Political Context: Crisis vs. Continuity
Farmaajo’s Presidency:
The political environment under Farmaajo was characterized by intense polarization. The delayed elections, constitutional disputes, and regional power struggles created a volatile atmosphere that demanded constant political engagement from both the government and its opposition.
In such a crisis-driven setting, the opposition found fertile ground to organize and rally public support. The high stakes of each political move kept both camps on edge, and the media heavily focused on the opposition’s counter-narratives.
Hassan Sheikh’s Presidency:
By contrast, the current administration has benefited from a more stable environment. Although Al-Shabaab remains a persistent threat and disputes with federal member states occasionally flare up, the Hassan Sheikh government has not faced the same level of constitutional crisis or political gridlock.
This comparative calm has reduced the urgency of opposition mobilization. Without a catalyzing political crisis, the opposition appears dormant or complacent, which further weakens their role as a check on executive power.
Conclusion: Unified Opposition vs. Disjointed Dissent
The contrast between the political opposition during Farmaajo’s term and that of Hassan Sheikh’s administration is stark. The former was unified, vocal, and effective—capable of exerting real pressure on the government and shaping the national agenda. The latter is fragmented, less organized, and largely reactive, with limited influence over governance or public opinion.
While Hassan Sheikh’s administration enjoys relative stability and international legitimacy, the absence of a strong opposition may lead to democratic stagnation. A vibrant and effective opposition is essential for democratic accountability, policy improvement, and citizen engagement.
Whether Somalia’s current opposition can reorganize and regain relevance remains to be seen. But as things stand, they are far from the force that once checked Farmaajo’s power and galvanized the nation.
