MOGADISHU, Somalia – The Upper House of the Somali Federal Parliament convened on October 11, 2025, for a critical session to debate its constitutional role in mediating the escalating political conflict between the Federal Government and several of its member states, particularly Jubbaland and Puntland.
Senators in the Upper House (Aqalka Sare) are engaged in a vigorous debate concerning their chamber’s responsibility to resolve the deepening political disputes between the Federal Government of Somalia (FGS) and the regional states. The discussion is based on an official report presented to the house, which outlines the growing tensions and proposes potential pathways for de-escalation.
The primary actors in this dispute are:
- The Federal Government of Somalia (FGS): The central government in Mogadishu.
- The Regional States of Jubbaland and Puntland: Two of the most powerful and politically assertive federal member states.
- The Upper House of Parliament: Composed of senators representing the federal member states, positioning itself as a potential neutral arbiter. Senators from Jubbaland and Puntland have been particularly vocal, accusing the FGS of “interference” and “orchestrating the collapse” of their administrations.
Two key factors drive the urgency of the debate:
- The Gedo Crisis: Reports that the FGS is planning to establish a new administration within Jubbaland’s Gedo region—a move Jubbaland President Ahmed Madobe has vehemently opposed, calling it a “violation of the federal partnership.”
- A Systemic Breakdown: The conflicts are perceived as crippling national state-building efforts and developmental programs, creating a volatile political environment that threatens Somalia’s stability.
The conflict is both institutional and territorial. Politically, it is centered in Mogadishu between federal institutions and the representatives of the states. Physically, the flashpoints are specific regions like Gedo in Jubbaland, which has become a battleground for control and influence.
The Upper House is debating how to leverage its unique constitutional mandate. As the chamber designed to represent the interests of the federal member states, it sees itself as a natural mediator. The debate centers on finding a constitutional and political mechanism to bridge the trust deficit and prevent a further fragmentation of the federal system.
This parliamentary session occurs against a backdrop of rapidly deteriorating federal-state relations. In recent days, Jubbaland filed a formal complaint with the United Nations, while the Hirshabelle state banned unauthorized military flights into its territory. These actions signal a coordinated or simultaneous push by regional states to resist the central government’s authority, challenging the very foundations of Somalia’s nascent federal model.
The debate in the Upper House represents a critical, constitutional attempt to de-escalate a political crisis that is paralyzing Somalia’s governance. By stepping into the fray, the Senate is testing its power to act as a stabilizing chamber of sober second thought. However, its ability to successfully mediate depends on whether the executive branch and the regional governments are willing to accept its authority. The outcome of this effort will be a crucial test for Somali federalism, determining whether political conflicts can be resolved within the halls of parliament or if they will continue to spill over, threatening the nation’s fragile security and unity. The international community, a key supporter of Somalia’s state-building, is watching closely as these internal divisions deepen.
