Mogadishu (Somalia Today) – Somalia’s political opposition on Tuesday declared parliament’s mandate expired and warned President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud against extending the political timetable beyond the constitution.
Former leaders and opposition groups accused the federal leadership of pushing Somalia towards a constitutional crisis at a sensitive time for a country already grappling with political divisions and an Islamist insurgency.
“The term of the Federal Parliament ends today, 14 April 2026, as stipulated in Article 60 of the provisional constitution,” Himilo Qaran, the political party led by former president Sharif Sheikh Ahmed, said in a statement.
The party said an “illegal overstay” and the destruction of state institutions “can never be accepted”, and accused the presidency of pushing the Horn of Africa nation towards a fresh political crisis.
Dangerous phase
Former president Mohamed Abdullahi Mohamed, better known as Farmaajo, issued a separate warning.
“Somalia has entered a dangerous phase affecting security, unity and statehood,” Farmaajo said.
He added that allowing parliament’s term to expire without seating a newly constituted legislature risked creating “legal confusion, lack of accountability and abuse of power”.
A third statement, from the Somali Future Council, a coalition of opposition groups and regional leaders from Puntland and Jubaland, echoed the criticism and accused Hassan Sheikh of creating the deadlock.
The council said the president was presenting Somalis with two choices, neither acceptable: a vote “whose outcome is already known” or a slide into “chaos and political turmoil”.
The legal dispute centres on Somalia’s 2012 provisional constitution.
Article 60 sets a four-year term for the federal parliament from the announcement of election results, while opposition figures also cite Article 91 as they argue that Hassan Sheikh’s presidential mandate expires on May 15.
But the revised constitution, which parliament approved on March 4, and Hassan Sheikh signed on March 8, extends the term of federal institutions from 4 to 5 years.
Supporters of the changes, including parliamentary speaker Sheikh Adan Mohamed Nur, say the provision applies immediately to current officeholders and would give parliament and the presidency an extra year.
The opposition rejects that reading and argues that extending terms mid-mandate is illegitimate and unconstitutional.
After the vote, analysts continued to debate whether the amendments automatically extend the current president’s term. Experts have made arguments on both sides.
The president also hailed the vote as a long-delayed breakthrough, but opponents said the legal consequences remained disputed and that Somalia still lacked an agreed electoral framework for a credible transition.
Electoral disputes
Tuesday’s statements marked the sharpest opposition pushback yet against that process, although the three reactions came separately rather than as part of a formal joint front.
The dispute goes to the heart of Somalia’s long and difficult transition from a clan-based indirect voting system to universal suffrage.
In December 2025, Mogadishu held municipal elections that many saw as the first step towards direct voting in Somalia since 1969.
Many also saw the vote in the capital as a test of whether broader national elections could follow.
But political mistrust has continued to cloud the transition.
In August 2025, the African Union welcomed a revised electoral framework agreement that Hassan Sheikh signed with one wing of the Salvation Forum, the main Somali opposition alliance.
The deal offered a possible path towards electing a new federal parliament and president, but it failed to win broad agreement across the political spectrum.
Several prominent opposition figures rejected the process, leaving Somalia divided over the rules of the next vote even as constitutional deadlines approached.
That lack of consensus has fuelled broader concerns that Somalia could once again face a dispute over legitimacy at the top of the state, a scenario with dangerous precedents in a country where political disagreements have at times spilled into armed confrontation.
Security risks
The constitutional row has also strained Somalia’s fragile federal system.
In March 2024, Puntland said it would no longer recognise the federal government until a nationwide referendum endorsed the disputed constitutional amendments, accusing Mogadishu of pushing through changes without sufficient consensus.
The dispute further strained already fraught relations between the centre and one of Somalia’s most influential federal member states.
The current opposition rhetoric also carries political weight because it includes Farmaajo, whose own 2021 attempt to extend his presidential mandate by up to two years triggered one of Somalia’s most serious political crises in recent years.
That move drew strong opposition from rivals and international partners and sparked armed clashes in Mogadishu between rival security factions before authorities eventually reversed the extension plan.
The episode remains a reminder of how quickly constitutional disputes in Somalia can turn into wider security confrontations.
The stakes are high as Somalia tries to rebuild state institutions while continuing to battle the Al-Qaeda-linked Al-Shabaab insurgency.
The political standoff also comes during a delicate security transition, with Somali forces taking on greater responsibility as the African Union mission shifts mandate and the government presses on with operations against the militants.
Against that backdrop, the three statements issued on Tuesday amounted to more than routine opposition criticism.
They sought to frame the coming weeks as a constitutional test for Hassan Sheikh’s administration, with parliament’s mandate now openly contested and the presidency approaching its own deadline.
Whether the dispute is resolved through negotiation or hardens into another political confrontation could shape not only the electoral timetable but also the stability of a country still trying to emerge from decades of conflict and institutional fragility.
