OPINION: MPs Criticised for Appealing to Foreign Actors on Somali Parliamentary Affairs

A letter allegedly authored by unidentified Members of the Somali Federal Parliament has triggered a widespread backlash after being sent to the United Nations Transitional Mission in Somalia (UNTMIS), the Human Rights Office, and CC’d to the International Community.

The unsigned letter contains accusations against Speaker Adan Mohamed Nur (Madobe), alleging abuse of office and violations of the Constitution and human rights. However, the message was sent without parliamentary endorsement, without debate, and outside of constitutional and institutional procedures.

CONSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORK IGNORED

Legal analysts point to Article 69 of the Provisional Constitution, which defines the powers and responsibilities of the House of the People. These include the authority to legislate, monitor national institutions, and summon public officials. Complaints of misconduct are required to be processed internally through House procedures.

“Nowhere in Article 69 is there a provision allowing individual MPs to make anonymous submissions to foreign actors on behalf of Parliament,” said one legal adviser.

LACK OF SIGNATURES DRAWS CONCERN

The letter does not bear signatures, names, or identifying details, raising serious concerns over transparency and accountability. Critics argue that the authors likely acted anonymously to avoid legal consequences while creating diplomatic pressure externally.

Without signatories, there is no legal basis for the communication to be recognised as an official parliamentary act.

RULES OF PARLIAMENT VIOLATED

In addition to breaching the Constitution, the act appears to contravene multiple House Rules of Procedure, including:

• Unauthorised representation: Only designated officials may speak for Parliament.
• Bypassing internal complaints processes: Ethical issues must be presented through standing committees.
• Disclosure without clearance: Allegations about parliamentary leadership require formal submission and review.

The Parliamentary Ethics and Discipline Committee is expected to initiate an inquiry.

POTENTIAL LEGAL CONSEQUENCES

Legal observers warn that the MPs behind the letter—if identified—could face:

• Disciplinary action for violating parliamentary rules,
• Charges of misconduct for breaching their oath of office,
• And accusations of undermining national sovereignty by inviting foreign involvement in unresolved domestic matters.

THREE-PART STRATEGY IDENTIFIED

Analysts say the letter appears structured to follow a deliberate three-part narrative:

            1.         The Speaker is framed as the aggressor.

            2.         The anonymous MPs present themselves as victims.

            3.         The international community is positioned as the solution.

They argue that this format seeks to shift internal political disagreements into the realm of foreign intervention without legal standing or internal resolution.

INTERNATIONAL NORMS CONTRADICTED

The move is also viewed as inconsistent with global parliamentary norms. Institutions such as the Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) emphasise national accountability and internal conflict resolution. Anonymous and unauthorised communication with foreign actors undermines those principles.

The letter addressed to UNTMIS,  Human Rights Office, and copied to the international community, lacks constitutional legitimacy, violates Article 69, and disregards Somalia’s parliamentary procedures.

Legal and disciplinary outcomes may follow as Parliament works to protect its sovereignty, institutional integrity, and adherence to the rule of law.

By Abdullahi M Hassan (Abdullahi Yabarow)

@siigaale1