Tensions and revenge killings have plagued Galkayo, Somalia for the last year. Here, Nisar Majid and Khalif Abdirahman compare justice and security in Galkayo, a current research focus, to Kismayo, where they previously worked and continue to follow.
This blogpost is in part inspired by the PeaceRep team’s observations of Somali elites in Kismayo who find the Galkayo model of clan dominance appealing but seem unaware of consequences like the risks of revenge killings. Conversely, residents of Galkayo are drawn to Kismayo’s centralised authority despite a political culture where competition is discouraged.
Justice and Security in Kismayo and Galkayo
Local contexts and histories
Kismayo
Under our previous research programme, we wrote about the ‘Kismayo Bubble’ in relation to justice and security. Kismayo has a cosmopolitan history, as do many coastal towns and cities in Somalia; their incorporation into historical maritime trading patterns, the impact of colonial administration and the expansion of urban centres from the 1960s to 1980s all influenced population movements and settlement dynamics prior to the collapse of the state. By the late 1980s, there were significant populations of Yemenis, Somalis from the rural hinterland, and Somalis from many other parts of the country all living in the town.
During the 1990s and up to the mid-2000s, Kismayo was extremely violent and insecure and contested by warlord figures. The arrival of the Islamic Courts Union (ICU) in 2006 marked a significant change in relation to security and the provision of justice. Ahmed Madobe, the current President of Jubbaland, was the Governor of Kismayo during the period of the ICU and has an Islamist perspective in relation to justice and security. The Jubbaland authority – at least in Kismayo – has implemented significant reforms to the justice system, as we documented in our Kismayo Bubble memo; this included removing corrupt judges and installing those trained in sharia’a law who were already trusted locally and practicing law in Kismayo.
Under the current president, certain practices in the provision of justice were adopted, notably that justice would not be based on clan hierarchies or dominance as is often not only the case but the expectation of many people. In a well-known case in Kismayo, Madobe authorised the execution of seven clan members from his own sub-clan who were associated with a killing. This instantly demonstrated that the Ogaden – to whom Madobe belongs – did not have impunity in Kismayo. In our previous work, and as we understand is still the case today, the local courts in Kismayo are very well utilised in everyday cases, such as marital disputes, injuries and accidents, and business disputes, and there is no culture of impunity when it comes to murders or revenge killings. This is not to say that there are not problems with the provision of justice in Kismayo, but, in the Somalia context, there are many good practices.
Galkayo
Galkayo does not have the same coastal history as Kismayo, but it is a significant urban centre in the heartland of Somalia. It is populated by three main clans, two in the north and one in the south, but many others also are resident and have a long history in the town.
Galkayo has been divided into its north and south domains, to different degrees, since colonial times. Like Kismayo, it also has a history of violence and insecurity. To some extent this was tempered by the division of the town in the early 1990s (by the Mudug Accord), into its northern (Darod) side, incorporated into Puntland, and its southern (Hawiye) side, more recently incorporated into Galmudug. The ICU did not reach Galkayo. However, following a major conflict in 2015/16 it did develop a significant peace agreement that has helped to rebuild social relations across the divide and has led to some joint policing and security arrangements.
Galkayo however remains a divided town. There are still two administrations (Puntland and Galmudug), with two sets of justice apparatus, and while there have been some important developments in relation to peacebuilding, justice and security remain highly problematic, as seen in the spate of revenge killings we reported on last year. Moreover, there is a culture of impunity when it comes to murders and revenge killings that we don’t see in Kismayo.
Methodological insights
One way we observe the difference between Kismayo and Galkayo in relation to justice and security is in the openness and confidence with which we are welcomed as researchers. In Kismayo, it was striking that there were no restrictions placed on us in terms of our presence in the courts or in access to the judges. Judges were also frank with the difficulties they faced in their work. In Galkayo, it has been much more difficult, with limited access to courts in Galkayo South eventually being obtained thanks to the initiative of one of the court officials, but not, directly, to those in Galkayo North. This is already an indication that justice provision is more problematic in the town.
Use of government courts
As indicated, Kismayo has a mixed population, with significant numbers of different clan identities, including many marginalised and minority groups. In the courts in Kismayo, we found high rates of attendance from a wide range of clan identities (we collected clan identity in our research process). In addition, we did not find correlations between court rulings and clan identities.
Galkayo North and Galkayo South are quite different in terms of clan identities, compared to Kismayo. Galkayo North is dominated by the Mijerteen-Omar Mohamoud and the Lelkasse along with other identity groups, while Galkayo South is dominated by the Haber Gedir-Sa’ad.
Although we have limited direct evidence from Galkayo North, we can say that courts are run by judges with mixed identity backgrounds, itself important, graduating from both local and international law schools (including sharia’a law). The reputation and use of the courts have improved in recent years, particularly in the provision of everyday justice, such as marital and family disputes, accidents and injuries and minor business disputes. Displaced people are also reported to use the courts, in many cases supported by NGO projects.
In Galkayo South, court attendance largely comprises the Sa’ad clan who make up a majority of the town’s population, although it is frequented by other Haber Gedir identities (the Sa’ad are a sub-clan of the Haber Gedir). Our findings to date suggest that while court judges are considered fair and credible, and come from a variety of identity backgrounds within Galmudug, the progression of cases and the ability to enforce outcomes are strongly determined by local power hierarchies. For example, in a land/property dispute that we followed between two members of the Sa’ad clan, considerable efforts were made by one party to dissuade and threaten the other party from pursuing the case. The claimant who brought the case explained to us that, as a member of the Sa’ad, he was able to resist these threats and pressures to drop the case, implying that this would be much more difficult for anyone from outside the Sa’ad.
Murders and revenge killings
One of the dramatic differences between Galkayo and Kismayo, especially evident over the last 12 months, has been the impunity with which murders take place and lead to escalations in tensions and revenge killings in Galkayo. In Kismayo, the Jubbaland authority is clearly the most powerful security actor, able to enforce law and order, and neutralising clan identity and power as the main determinant of justice. While the president and the Jubbaland forces are strongly correlated with one clan, efforts are made to demonstrate that belonging to this clan does not create entitlements or expectations of immunity from justice. In Galkayo however, there is no equivalent authority or security actor and clan-based militias (including those with known criminal elements) are able to mobilise resources in order to carry out revenge killings and resist the efforts of official security actors, whether police or military. Known criminals and murderers are able to walk the town’s streets freely.
Conclusions
Somali audiences are often wary of making comparisons between places, as this feeds into competitive and politicised clan narratives about the relative success or failure of one place (and therefore identity group) over another. This is unfortunate because it limits learning from different places, experiences and models of justice and security.
In our opinion, and from our previous research, Kismayo provides an example of good practice in relation to the development of justice and security. There are particular reasons for this; historical, geographic and in terms of political culture. However, this relative success story has come with other challenges, namely an authoritarian culture where political competition is discouraged.
Galkayo, although an important urban centre, is a neglected town in many respects. No solution has yet been found for its divided status – hence its two local administrations – and clan militias are far more powerful than governmental authorities or elders, leading to escalations in revenge killings.
Our forthcoming policy memo on Galkayo will develop these issues in more detail.
Explore all PeaceRep Somalia research here.