| Front Page |
The Rule of Law and The Return of Osman Kaluun
By Ahmed M.I. Egal
The return of Osman Kaluun (the erstwhile Deputy PM of the TNG) to Somaliland raises an important and interesting issue that needs to be clearly addressed and not simply ducked or avoided in the deference to mistaken and misplaced notions of generosity and magnanimity. Firstly, I must confess that I do not know why Osman Kaluun has returned to Somaliland even though he has in the past made crystal clear his determined opposition to its very existence as an independent nation, neither am I aware of any arrangement reached by him with the government of JSL regarding his return. The issue that his return raises and which must be addressed is how to deal with political figures such as him, who have publicly voiced their opposition to Somaliland’s independence and which have therefore, according to the resolutions passed by the Somaliland Parliament, committed treason against their country of birth.
This issue is important for several reasons. Firstly, Osman Kaluun is neither the first nor the only Somalilander who falls into this category. There are many others who have chosen, for whatever reason, to condemn vociferously and repeatedly Somaliland’s reclaim of its hard-won sovereignty, and it is only to be expected that many of these people will return in the future, since their goal of re-establishing the 1961 republic is dead, except in name. Secondly, equality of treatment, as well as equitability of said treatment, is important in a nation governed by laws. This issue goes to the very heart of our democracy, since one of the fundamental and defining principles of democracy vis-à-vis autocratic forms of government is equality before the law for all citizens, irrespective of their ethnicity, race, gender etc. Therefore, we must deal with all ‘treasonous’ returnees alike, irrespective of who they may be or what position they may have held elsewhere. The alternative of dealing with each individual on a case-by-case basis is unsatisfactory because it is open to manipulation, special pleading, favouritism and other influences which will inevitably result in decisions that are palpably unfair.
I am aware that the late Abdirahman Tuur (Allahu yarhamah) was probably the most high profile figure who returned to Somaliland after having opposed its independence and after holding office in the TNG. However, I believe that a convincing case can be made to consider the marhum a special case, in view of his status as the founding President of Somaliland and the Chairman of the SNM during the liberation of the country. As the man who announced Somaliland’s re-emergence as an independent country to the world in 1991, as well as having been the first President of the newly declared JSL, Abdirahman Tuur occupies a special and unique place in the hearts and minds of all Somalilanders and I do not believe that any Somalilander begrudges his rehabilitation into Somaliland life at the end of his long career.
Osman Kaluun, and the others who will inevitably follow his example, however, are a completely different kettle of fish. These people occupy no special or unique place in the history of the country or in the psyche of its citizens. They are politicians who have made deliberate decisions with their eyes wide open, and they must be expected to accept the responsibilities of those decisions. Further, the people of Somaliland have every right to expect them to subjected to the same laws to which they are subject and which they freely ratified by a margin of 97 to 3.
Osman Kaluun, and other similar returnees, should be brought before the courts of Somaliland to answer the appropriate charges applicable to them in relation to their treasonous activities against JSL. The Attorney General should pursue the case against these individuals with all the powers at his disposal and with the utmost dispatch, as he would with any other case. If the government of Somaliland wishes to pardon them after they have been sentenced (assuming that they are found guilty) that is entirely at their discretion, if Osman Kaluun, and others, are found innocent, then the question of a pardon does not arise, of course. The important point is that the law must pursue its proper course and that no special dispensation be made for these individuals in some mistaken feeling of forgiveness. Forgiveness is a wonderful trait and we are commanded by Allah to exercise forgiveness in relation to those who trespass against us as individuals.
However, in a free and democratic country it is necessary for the common good of all the people that the law be impartial and equal in its application to all citizens, if it is to mean anything and for people to respect and uphold it. Those who consciously and willingly choose to flout the law of the land must be brought before the proper courts and be made accountable for their actions. This as true for Osman Kaluun and similar political figures as it is for any other law breaker, e.g. a thief or a murderer. Dealing with these individuals in any other way demeans respect for the law and sends the signal that committing treason against JSL is not a big deal – simply return and apologise and all is forgiven. Why would any reasonable person obey the law in such a country, where the most serious of crimes is so simply forgiven with no recourse to the law? Further, what does the law really mean in such a society, clearly not very much. Thus, while we can and should welcome our errant brothers back into the fold of our collective bosom as good people, equally we must insist that they be made to answer for their crimes as good citizens.
Home | Contact us | Links | Archives