Everyone talks about Somaliland having a multi-party democracy, well that is 'disputed' by some Puntites as not accurate, they argue Somaliland hasn't done a single parliamentary election since 2005 or something shocking, so their MPS are basically in office since the 2005 election.
Somaliland democracy in reality is 'the presidential election' nothing else, they lack every other democratic institution.
First of all let's measure how 'democratic' Somaliland is or if it's just a 'democracy' in name and 'SNM rebel enclave'?
The following institutions are considered absolutely mandatory to be considered a 'democracy'.
1. Freedom of speech, idealogy, and the ability to congregate publically
2. Equality of all people irrespective of racial/clan/gender/religion/political idealogy.
3. Freedom of religion
4. Freedom of the Media
5. Elections(popular and parliamentary)
6. Civil liberties or 'human rights'
Somaliland lacks Freedom of Idealogy and Speech, the amount of people arrested daily for holding a unionist political position is astounding. The range of people arrested are musicians, sports people, politicians, youth, journalists, religious clerics, etc. So no-one can argue that Somaliland has freedom of speech and freedom of political idealogy, it's a totally 'censored' society like 'north korea' or 'eritrea' in that respect and it's about time we call it that.
Equality of Somaliland is clearly absent with 80% of the state represented by 1 clan, where-as they are not 80% of the region they claim and only live in 40% of the region where-as Harti are 30% of the region and Awdal 20%. The region is split 5 ways between 5 clans according to 'their unrecognied borders'. There is no doubt that SL representation is geared towards the 'center' of that region or as the other clans refer to them as 'beesha d dhexe' meaning 'middle clan' indicating they live only in the 'middle zone of SL' and not all 'SL' or 'North Somalia' what-ever term u prefer to use. Gender equality is also absent with women not meeting the 30% mark in govt institutions and forget religious equality.
Freedom of Religion is another area of democracy without this your cannot be a proper democracy. The amount of churches closed and christians arrested is astounding for simply preaching or practising their religion. Djibouti a dictatorship has better freedoms for religion then this quasi 'democracy' called Somaliland.
Freedom of Media is absent with lots of journalists arrested or the govt interference of 'media' to create an 'image' of SL that truly doesn't exist on the ground.
Elections - All democracies have parliaments and presidential elections. Both functions of the government need to go to the polls regularly every 4-5 years. SL only has 'presidential' election and not the 'parliamentary elections'. So even this is a 'flawed' election model.
Somaliland human rights situation or their civil liberties of their citizens is also 'infringed' on by the government such as the right to do 'zina, b gay, alcohol, pork, etc' which is all regulated like a 'communist' society applying laws for 'all' people with-out due care to 'individual rights' and 'personal freedoms'. I swear Djibouti next door who isn't a democracy and doesn't need to live up to those standards has better 'freedoms' then this so-called 'fake democracy' called Somaliland.
I mean this region argues you can 'chew khat' but then 'restricts' alcohol, picking one poison over another makes no sense. They do not allow gays or fornication but they have no issue with mosques teaching it's ok to marry 'children' lol. I mean what sort of nonsense is this? the government cannot govern people morals, morals are personal and is an individual right to have his own morals develop at home not formed by the government.
Now let's look at Puntland index. I am not arguing it's much better in human rights and freedom of religion.
I acknowledge PL doesn't have a govt elected thru a popular election but it does change government and it's parliament is changed regularly every 5 years is undisputable. Their have been more 'presidential' and parliament changes in PL to SL, where each presidency is extended in SL like 'siilanyo, rayaale, egal' all extended their terms giving themselves another 4 years.
Moryan Bihi is obviously going to be no different since other clans did it will be his reasoning. Their parliament has never changed since 2005 where-as PL has had 'farole parliament, gas parliament, and now deni parliament' litrally 3 successive parliament changes while for SL it has been nil.
Where PL succeeds according to me is, it doesn't restrict different political idealogies at the same scale as SL. You do hear of times some 'meetings' of 'politicians' being 'stopped' here and there but it's not a 'constant' thing where it becomes a norm.
PL only get's involved with people idealogy if it has a 'militant or violent' agenda, how-ever outside of that people are fairly 'free in political idealogy and speech and the ability to congregate'. Even the ability to congregate can be 'infringed' on by the govt at times but the reasons given is 'security' and not that people cannot peacefully congregate and hold a political idealogy that is different to the government either in public, media, hotels. Where-as in SL you can be arrested just for wearing a 'blue flag shirt' that's how bad it is.
How is a 'blue somalia shirt' a 'security risk'? U see what I mean? I am certain many 'landers' live in PL and wear 'lander' shirts and no-one gives a f*ck.
The other thing is in PL the range of idealogies is more diverse then say SL where 'SNM' run the roost and there is no other idealogy in power since it's founding. In PL you have SSDF/Islamist/Secularist/Secessionist/Federalist/Centralist are all very active in PL and rarely are they restricted from congregating in hotels or public nor the media except when PL declares that it is a 'security' risk and on the grounds of security they take away their freedoms.
However the other areas of freedom of religion, civil liberties n human rights, equality of gender is also absent in PL. How-ever PL power-sharing is far more 'ideal' then say SL where 80% of parliament and govt and institutions is Isaaq even though they do not constitute that sort of population in the north. In PL even though 'Majerten' constitute 60% of the population, Dhulbahante/Warsangeli constitute 40%, u see this sort of 'power-sharing' in our parliament, govt, and institutions along those lines. Why? cause we use 'district' portion representation based on 91 borders.
So PL is beating SL in many indexes such as freedom of media, freedom of idealogy as seen with the diverse idealogies(federalists, seccessionist, centralists, islamist, secularist, ssdf) existing in PL. All are allowed to speak their mind in public and gather in public or hotels or in the media without the govt cracking down as long as they are not 'security risk' of course.
PL n SL are tied with an absence of freedom of religion-civil liberties-human rights. As for who has superior election system this is a tough one and I would say PL/SL are tied. Why? PL at least 'changes it's parliament n president' smoothly with no extension and it's based on the rule of law. Where-as in SL this isn't the case, every president extends his 'term' for an 'extra 4 years' as seen with siilanyo-rayale-egal and possibly BIHI next.
PL parliament also regularly changes since 98 we have had a new parliament every 4-5 years without fail. In SL they haven't had a parliamentary election since 2005.
Let that sink in waryaa, that's nearly 15 years the parliament has been in power in SL. So that's two goals for PL and the one goal for SL is 'popular vote of their president' even though it gets 'delayed' constantly and extended each presidential term, they do finally hold a presidential election. Now in all fairness I would give PL the green light as being a superior govt with better election system then SL, however since SL holds popular vote for presidential election(even if not on time) it does balance them back.
I personally would choose PL over SL in this measurement for elections but to be fair I will say it can be 'disputed' on either side that a popular election of a president is better then parliament selection, where-as puntite can argue back well we have changed president on time with no extension and so has our parliament.
But the points in Pl favor are definitely
1. Freedom of idealogy, speech, and the ability to congregate in public and media
2. Diversity of idealogy such as ssdf/islamist/secularist/federalist/centralist/secessionist, which will make for an interesting multi-party system.
3. The media is far more free in PL as long as they are not causing a 'security' problem. In SL the media and journalist are constantly harassed not because of 'security' but because they are not 'free' to discuss 'unionist' idealogy or discuss anything.
PL and SL are equalized here
1. Civil liberties, human rights, personal freedoms, freedom of religion, are absent in both regions.
2. Election model of both regions. Even though SL has popular vote system, it's not utilized for parliament elections since 2005 and their presidential election is always delayed and extended for 4 years showing 'less compliance for the rule of law'. Where-as PL holds elections on time, no extensions and the parliament has changed every 4-5 years without any instability. So that's why I tied them here.
Somaliland democracy in reality is 'the presidential election' nothing else, they lack every other democratic institution.
First of all let's measure how 'democratic' Somaliland is or if it's just a 'democracy' in name and 'SNM rebel enclave'?
The following institutions are considered absolutely mandatory to be considered a 'democracy'.
1. Freedom of speech, idealogy, and the ability to congregate publically
2. Equality of all people irrespective of racial/clan/gender/religion/political idealogy.
3. Freedom of religion
4. Freedom of the Media
5. Elections(popular and parliamentary)
6. Civil liberties or 'human rights'
Somaliland lacks Freedom of Idealogy and Speech, the amount of people arrested daily for holding a unionist political position is astounding. The range of people arrested are musicians, sports people, politicians, youth, journalists, religious clerics, etc. So no-one can argue that Somaliland has freedom of speech and freedom of political idealogy, it's a totally 'censored' society like 'north korea' or 'eritrea' in that respect and it's about time we call it that.
Equality of Somaliland is clearly absent with 80% of the state represented by 1 clan, where-as they are not 80% of the region they claim and only live in 40% of the region where-as Harti are 30% of the region and Awdal 20%. The region is split 5 ways between 5 clans according to 'their unrecognied borders'. There is no doubt that SL representation is geared towards the 'center' of that region or as the other clans refer to them as 'beesha d dhexe' meaning 'middle clan' indicating they live only in the 'middle zone of SL' and not all 'SL' or 'North Somalia' what-ever term u prefer to use. Gender equality is also absent with women not meeting the 30% mark in govt institutions and forget religious equality.
Freedom of Religion is another area of democracy without this your cannot be a proper democracy. The amount of churches closed and christians arrested is astounding for simply preaching or practising their religion. Djibouti a dictatorship has better freedoms for religion then this quasi 'democracy' called Somaliland.
Freedom of Media is absent with lots of journalists arrested or the govt interference of 'media' to create an 'image' of SL that truly doesn't exist on the ground.
Elections - All democracies have parliaments and presidential elections. Both functions of the government need to go to the polls regularly every 4-5 years. SL only has 'presidential' election and not the 'parliamentary elections'. So even this is a 'flawed' election model.
Somaliland human rights situation or their civil liberties of their citizens is also 'infringed' on by the government such as the right to do 'zina, b gay, alcohol, pork, etc' which is all regulated like a 'communist' society applying laws for 'all' people with-out due care to 'individual rights' and 'personal freedoms'. I swear Djibouti next door who isn't a democracy and doesn't need to live up to those standards has better 'freedoms' then this so-called 'fake democracy' called Somaliland.
I mean this region argues you can 'chew khat' but then 'restricts' alcohol, picking one poison over another makes no sense. They do not allow gays or fornication but they have no issue with mosques teaching it's ok to marry 'children' lol. I mean what sort of nonsense is this? the government cannot govern people morals, morals are personal and is an individual right to have his own morals develop at home not formed by the government.
Now let's look at Puntland index. I am not arguing it's much better in human rights and freedom of religion.
I acknowledge PL doesn't have a govt elected thru a popular election but it does change government and it's parliament is changed regularly every 5 years is undisputable. Their have been more 'presidential' and parliament changes in PL to SL, where each presidency is extended in SL like 'siilanyo, rayaale, egal' all extended their terms giving themselves another 4 years.
Moryan Bihi is obviously going to be no different since other clans did it will be his reasoning. Their parliament has never changed since 2005 where-as PL has had 'farole parliament, gas parliament, and now deni parliament' litrally 3 successive parliament changes while for SL it has been nil.
Where PL succeeds according to me is, it doesn't restrict different political idealogies at the same scale as SL. You do hear of times some 'meetings' of 'politicians' being 'stopped' here and there but it's not a 'constant' thing where it becomes a norm.
PL only get's involved with people idealogy if it has a 'militant or violent' agenda, how-ever outside of that people are fairly 'free in political idealogy and speech and the ability to congregate'. Even the ability to congregate can be 'infringed' on by the govt at times but the reasons given is 'security' and not that people cannot peacefully congregate and hold a political idealogy that is different to the government either in public, media, hotels. Where-as in SL you can be arrested just for wearing a 'blue flag shirt' that's how bad it is.
How is a 'blue somalia shirt' a 'security risk'? U see what I mean? I am certain many 'landers' live in PL and wear 'lander' shirts and no-one gives a f*ck.
The other thing is in PL the range of idealogies is more diverse then say SL where 'SNM' run the roost and there is no other idealogy in power since it's founding. In PL you have SSDF/Islamist/Secularist/Secessionist/Federalist/Centralist are all very active in PL and rarely are they restricted from congregating in hotels or public nor the media except when PL declares that it is a 'security' risk and on the grounds of security they take away their freedoms.
However the other areas of freedom of religion, civil liberties n human rights, equality of gender is also absent in PL. How-ever PL power-sharing is far more 'ideal' then say SL where 80% of parliament and govt and institutions is Isaaq even though they do not constitute that sort of population in the north. In PL even though 'Majerten' constitute 60% of the population, Dhulbahante/Warsangeli constitute 40%, u see this sort of 'power-sharing' in our parliament, govt, and institutions along those lines. Why? cause we use 'district' portion representation based on 91 borders.
So PL is beating SL in many indexes such as freedom of media, freedom of idealogy as seen with the diverse idealogies(federalists, seccessionist, centralists, islamist, secularist, ssdf) existing in PL. All are allowed to speak their mind in public and gather in public or hotels or in the media without the govt cracking down as long as they are not 'security risk' of course.
PL n SL are tied with an absence of freedom of religion-civil liberties-human rights. As for who has superior election system this is a tough one and I would say PL/SL are tied. Why? PL at least 'changes it's parliament n president' smoothly with no extension and it's based on the rule of law. Where-as in SL this isn't the case, every president extends his 'term' for an 'extra 4 years' as seen with siilanyo-rayale-egal and possibly BIHI next.
PL parliament also regularly changes since 98 we have had a new parliament every 4-5 years without fail. In SL they haven't had a parliamentary election since 2005.
Let that sink in waryaa, that's nearly 15 years the parliament has been in power in SL. So that's two goals for PL and the one goal for SL is 'popular vote of their president' even though it gets 'delayed' constantly and extended each presidential term, they do finally hold a presidential election. Now in all fairness I would give PL the green light as being a superior govt with better election system then SL, however since SL holds popular vote for presidential election(even if not on time) it does balance them back.
I personally would choose PL over SL in this measurement for elections but to be fair I will say it can be 'disputed' on either side that a popular election of a president is better then parliament selection, where-as puntite can argue back well we have changed president on time with no extension and so has our parliament.
But the points in Pl favor are definitely
1. Freedom of idealogy, speech, and the ability to congregate in public and media
2. Diversity of idealogy such as ssdf/islamist/secularist/federalist/centralist/secessionist, which will make for an interesting multi-party system.
3. The media is far more free in PL as long as they are not causing a 'security' problem. In SL the media and journalist are constantly harassed not because of 'security' but because they are not 'free' to discuss 'unionist' idealogy or discuss anything.
PL and SL are equalized here
1. Civil liberties, human rights, personal freedoms, freedom of religion, are absent in both regions.
2. Election model of both regions. Even though SL has popular vote system, it's not utilized for parliament elections since 2005 and their presidential election is always delayed and extended for 4 years showing 'less compliance for the rule of law'. Where-as PL holds elections on time, no extensions and the parliament has changed every 4-5 years without any instability. So that's why I tied them here.
