#Somalia: Kampala Communiqué: Sell out of Somali National So...
#Somalia: Kampala Communiqué: Sell out of Somali National So...: Kampala Communiqué: Sell out of Somali National Sovereignty and self-government. (Part 1) Here I will make a legal, political ...
Kampala Communiqué: Sell out of Somali National Sovereignty and self-government.(Part 1&2)
Kampala Communiqué: Sell out of Somali National Sovereignty and self-government. (Part 1)
Here I will make a legal, political analysis of the last Kampala Communiqué and its consequences on Somali Sovereignty (including the powers exercised by officers representing the Government), Unity and territorial integrity of the Somali federal Republic. First I will make a literal legal/political interpretation of the articles of the Communiqué/Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Somali government and heads of states and governments of the new Supranational Entity called” Troops Contributing Countries (TCCs)” which from now on will be “stakeholders”( not partners) with IGAD, Amisom on the future and destiny of the Somali Clan-Communities/People-citizens represented by the Somali government. The meeting was in Kampala, 4/ August 2013 and called “Towards a harmonized approach by “the Stakeholders” in Building a Peaceful Somalia”.
I will take the most controversial articles at first and at end make a wrap up of the totality of the articles of “new accord of Kampala” specially what” The Summit Agreed”:
At article 15 “Decided”,” in accordance with the Provisional Federal Constitution of Somalia, that the control of the Kismayo seaport and airport should be handed over to the federal Government of Somalia”. My question is first which authority was controlling these essential infrastructures of the Somali state? Secondly who gave this Supranational Authority called TCCs to tell the Somali government what to do or not do about their National infrastructures? When and where the Somali Council of Ministers, Somali parliament have endorsed a Law making Somalia member to this new grouping made up of the Countries contributing troops to Somalia and decide for Somalia government policies? This troops stationed in Somalia are sanctioned by a UN security Council resolutions after the request of another supranational Authority called IGAD which Somalia is member by an international agreement signed by the Regime of Siad barre. But the request has been made under the African Union which is the continental representative and recognized by the UN. In other words these Troops are in Somalia under a UN mandate. In their mandate they do not have any authority (political/administrative) on Somali national infrastructures. Their mandate is to fight the Extremist group Al-Shabaab and assist the Somali government in the security and assist in reestablishing their own institutions be security forces or administrations with the utmost respect for the Sovereignty and Unity/territorial integrity of the Republic of Somalia. That the Amisom forces took under their control a Somali seaport and Airport without the consent and approval of the Somali state is in contravention of their Mandate and now a new Authority not sanctioned by the UN Security Council “Deciding” on the Control of Somali National infrastructures in Kismayo is in Contravention of the UN Mandate for AMISOM. Here I would like to bring to the attention of the Somali-People that their government is becoming part in a deception plan “giving authority” to a Supranational Authority called TCCs in deciding on the fate of Somali national infrastructures. In the same time “recognizing” indirectly the Illegal control of the Somali National Infrastructures by AMISOM forces in KIsmayo. The Somali government is “sole representative” of Somali-people-citizens and has the Will as a Sovereign power on all Somali Territory even when they do not have an “effective military power over it”. In other words the Somali government is the “sole legitimate and legal power” in Somalia recognized Under International Law and is mandated by the provisional Constitution and they do not need any agreement with foreign authorities in administrating directly its own national infrastructures. This foreign powers (AMISOM) are under the mandate of UN Security Council and are there” only with the consent” of the “Sovereign” Somali government and with UN Mandate. The Somali government legally is the” sole Authority” in charge of the port of Kismayo. “De facto” is run by Armies under the mandate of Amisom but they are there under their “Sovereign consent”. Why the Somali governments have to beg and be decided upon on a territory and infrastructures which the Somali government represents? It could be for two reasons: (1) If the Somalis officers representing the government are inept and incompetent in not knowing their role as representative of Somali sovereignty and the National /public interests of Somalia or(2) They are corrupt and doing treasonable acts which are not sanctioned by the Somali constitution and the programs of the Government.
(To be continued.Part1)
Part ( 2)
At article( 16) they agreed that” Stressed that in line with UN Security Council Resolutions; the ban on the exportation of Charcoal should be adhered to”. First let me explain that there was going an illegal export of charcoal from the Port of Kismayo when the place was under the extremist group Al-Shabaab. When the Amisom forces took control of the security of Kismayo town the illegal export went on as usual and still the profits are divided between The Ras kamboni Militia, (Salafist) business individuals and Al-Shabaab as have been reported by the UN Monitoring group on Somalia and Eritrea mandate by the Security Council.. Here in this article there is not any mention at all of this criminal/terrorist financing activities going on at the port but to adhere to the UN ban on Charcoal. Unfortunaly for the Somali people-citizens their government has abdicated their sovereignty and given the TCCs to deliberate on Somali sovereignty , governance and territorial issues in contravention of Somali provisional Constitution. This issue is still hot in the media with the Kenyan government( which Armies under the banner of Amisom control Kiemayo) reneging even on that distorted accord by saying through their representatives that ‘they will not give up the control of the port and seaport for the time being”. This will mean the Ras- Kamboni Militia allied to Amisom who is self-declared Rulers of Kismayo will continue the Illegal export of charcoal, dividing the profits from the export with Al-shabaab and the (Salafist) business cartels that represent the interests of Al-Shabaab in Kismayo town. All in contravention of Somali national Laws, directives of Somali government and the UN ban on the illegal export of charcoal from Kismayo.
At art.17 they agreed “Decided that all Militias should be integrated into the Somalia National security forces except those associated with Al-Shabaab which should be isolated”. Let me explain that in Kismayo and Jubbaland regions there are different militias with different “vested interests”, who vow allegiance to different clan- communities and foreign powers plus rag-tag soldiers purporting to represent the Somali government, and some of them trained, allied to Ethiopia and Kenya. In this kaleidoscope of Militias and “vested interests” which all fought against Al-shabaab in guerilla warfare, who can say some of them are sympathizers to Al-Shabaab and isolated? Which criteria will be used and how we can discriminate against some and take others? My conclusion is by being the Ethiopian Chiefs of Staff being involved in the “operational decisions” of Amisom Military Operations Coordination committee (MOCC) as agreed in art.33,the clans-Communities which have refused and rebelled against the self-declared Authority of Ras-Kamboni in Kismayo supported by Ethiopia and Kenya will be “identified” as sympathizers of Al-Shabaab and isolated from joining the “would be Somali Army”. The government of Somalia has abdicated its sovereignty totally to the point that who is going to be a National Army Soldier is decided in Ethiopia, Uganda, Kenya Chiefs of Army Staffs decision-making and not “sole prerogative’ of Somali National Army Commander , government and parliament, according to TCCs Communiqué.
(To be continued)
#Somalia: Kampala Communique :Sell-out of Somali National So...
#Somalia: Kampala Communique :Sell-out of Somali National So...: Kampala Communiqué: Sell out of Somali National Sovereignty and self-government. (Part 1) Here I will make a legal, political ...
Kampala Communique :Sell-out of Somali National Sovereignty and self-governmnet.(Part1).
Kampala Communiqué:
Sell out of Somali National Sovereignty and self-government. (Part 1)
Here I will make a legal, political
analysis of the last Kampala Communiqué and its consequences on Somali
Sovereignty (including the powers exercised by officers representing the
Government), Unity and territorial integrity of the Somali federal Republic.
First I will make a literal legal/political interpretation of the articles of
the Communiqué/Memorandum of Understanding signed by the Somali government and
heads of states and governments of the new Supranational Entity called” Troops Contributing
Countries (TCCs)” which from now on will be “stakeholders”( not partners) with IGAD,
Amisom on the future and destiny of the Somali Clan-Communities/People-citizens,National territory,Unity represented by the Somali government. The meeting was in Kampala, 4/ August
2013 and called “Towards a harmonized approach by “the Stakeholders” in Building
a Peaceful Somalia”.
I will take the most controversial
articles at first and at end make a wrap up of the totality of
the articles of “new accord of Kampala” specially what” The Summit Agreed”:
At article
15 “Decided”,” in accordance with the Provisional Federal Constitution of Somalia,
that the control of the Kismayo seaport and airport should be handed over to
the federal Government of Somalia”. My question is first which authority was
controlling these essential infrastructures of the Somali state? Secondly who
gave this Supranational Authority called TCCs to tell the Somali government
what to do or not do about their National infrastructures? When and where the Somali Council of Ministers, Somali parliament have endorsed a Law making
Somalia member to this new grouping made up of the Countries contributing
troops to Somalia and decide for Somalia government policies? This troops stationed in Somalia are
sanctioned by a UN security Council resolutions after the request of another supranational
Authority called IGAD which Somalia is member by an international agreement signed by
the Regime of Siad barre. But the request has been made
under the African Union which is the continental representative and recognized
by the UN. In other words these Troops are in Somalia under a UN mandate. In
their mandate they do not have any authority (political/administrative) on
Somali national infrastructures. Their mandate is to fight the Extremist group
Al-Shabaab and assist the Somali government in the security and assist in
reestablishing their own institutions be security forces or administrations
with the utmost respect for the Sovereignty and Unity/territorial integrity of
the Republic of Somalia. That the Amisom forces took under their control a
Somali seaport and Airport without the consent and approval of the Somali state
is in contravention of their Mandate and now a new Authority not sanctioned by
the UN Security Council “Deciding” on
the Control of Somali National infrastructures in Kismayo is in Contravention of the UN Mandate for
AMISOM. Here I would like to bring to the attention of the Somali-People that
their government is becoming part in a deception plan “giving authority” to a Supranational
Authority called TCCs in deciding on the fate of Somali national
infrastructures. In the same time “recognizing” indirectly the Illegal control
of the Somali National Infrastructures by AMISOM forces in Kismayo. The
Somali government is “sole representative” of Somali-people-citizens and has
the Will as a Sovereign power on all Somali Territory even when they do not
have an “effective military power over it”. In other words the Somali
government is the “sole legitimate and legal power” in Somalia recognized Under
International Law and is mandated by the provisional Constitution and they do
not need any agreement with foreign authorities in administrating directly its
own national infrastructures. This foreign powers (AMISOM) are under the
mandate of UN Security Council and are there” only with the consent” of the
“Sovereign” Somali government and with UN Mandate. The Somali government
legally is the” sole Authority” in charge of the port of Kismayo. “De facto” is
run by Armies under the mandate of Amisom but they are there under their
“Sovereign consent”. Why the Somali governments have to beg and be decided upon
on a territory and infrastructures which the Somali government represents? It
could be for two reasons: (1) If the
Somalis officers representing the government
are inept and incompetent in not knowing their role as representatives of
Somali sovereignty and the National /public interests of Somalia or(2) They are corrupt and doing treasonable acts
which are not sanctioned by the Somali constitution and the programs of the Government.
(To be
continued.Part1)
#Somalia: The meaning of the "Treatening Edicts" of Puntland...
#Somalia: The meaning of the "Treatening Edicts" of Puntland...: I am sorry to say but MR. Farole do not have any real knowledge of the Somali provisional constitution and he has not powers to amend ...
The meaning of the "Treatening Edicts" of Puntland Leader Mr.Farole.
I am sorry to say but MR. Farole do not have any real knowledge of the Somali provisional constitution and he has not powers to amend it as he sees it.This " Threatening Edicts" he always says on the
Media are totally worthless when we talk about the existence and sovereignty under International Law of the
Somali Federal government. Let me say its cheap
talk in other words he is always portraying the Somali republic as a
Land inhibited by Clans and not people- citizens who can understand the
Law and the meaning of the Unity of the Somali Republic in Law and the
Unity of its people-citizens in Culture, Religion and Ancestry.If we
talk only about the Law there is not any article which permits Mr. Farole to go to international meetings as "we were two different
Republics" in one System. Going at the meeting in Brussels on September(
the Somali federal government and the region-state of Puntland) will mean
there are two governments and "sovereignty" in Somalia.Nobody has
tempered with the Law and have changed any article he just trying to
look for "expedients" which are not existing.In Somalia there are
different region states like Puntland which the Constitution explicitly
mentions and accommodates but also the Constitutions says the Unity of Somalia is"
inviolable and indivisible".The Somali federal government is for all and
is a "sole" representative of the National and Public interest of all
Somalia.For a very long time the Agenda of the Ethiopia-IGAD hegemonic
group to make and think the Somalis through the" utterances" of their
Leaders and Warlords that they are "different entities legally" and is what
Mr. Farole repeating all the time.The game plan of Farole and others
like him is to have Somalia subdivided in five or six states which are
under the umbrella of a Confederate system. He cannot tell to the
Somalis that game plan but uses the "story" that the real meaning of the
Constitution is a Confederate System which is not true.There are behind him OIL and Gas
companies who would like to subdivide Somalia to get new "concessional
rights" in Puntland and other regions.Just to give you an example last
year Mr. Farole has hired a Lobby Company in the US to " change" the
"concessional rights" of the "Conoco Philips company has got in HOLHOL
area.To change and renew it under a new "concessional rights" issued by the
region state of Puntland( under this constitution only the federal government has that right). Secondly by subdividing Somalia Farole is
working for those who wont to Recolonize Somalia and make Somalia where
the people speak Amhara and Swahili as national Languages and its
people-communities made to live under so-called Vassal States controlled
and subject to Ethiopia-IGAD group.On his last "utterance" he is
trying to cover the internal crisis in Puntland in which the
Communities have stopped his Agenda of a new dictatorship through a
concocted election next month in that region of the Somali Republic.Wait and see.
In Defense Of Somali Territorial waters-from Somalitalk.com Pages.
In defense of Somali territorial waters-from Somalitalk.com pages
UN REPORTS: S/2013/413
12 July 2013
"Once Somalia adopts the EEZ under the UNCLOS regime, Somalia and Kenya would be required to initiate a separate process to negotiate a mutually acceptable maritime boundary. This would open the possibility of an adjustment of the maritime boundary from its perpendicular position towards a position following the line of latitude. Such a shift would effectively place some if not all of the disputed licenses mentioned above back into Kenyan waters. It is for this reason that on 8 October 2011 the Somali MPs voted down attempts to introduce an EEZ during the Roadmap process." UN Report, July 12, 2013.
Conflict between Somalia and Kenya over the maritime boundary
Somalia and Kenya have differing interpretations of their maritime boundary and associated offshore territorial rights. Currently, Somalia claims its maritime boundary with Kenya lies perpendicular to the coast, though this boundary is not enshrined in a mutually accepted agreement with Kenya, which envisages the maritime boundary as being defined by the line of latitude protruding from its boundary with Somalia.25
Map of disputed offshore zone between Somalia and Kenya, including positions of Kenyan issued oil licenses.
The FGS has thus refused to recognise oil licenses granted to multinational companies by Kenya and which protrude into waters defined as Somali according to that perpendicular demarcation line. Oil multinational companies affected by the FGS opposition have included French oil company Total (Kenyan license L22), Italian major ENI (Kenyan licenses L21, L23 and L24), US oil firm Anadarko (Kenyan license L5) and Norway’s majority state-funded Statoil26 (Kenyan license L26) (see again annex 5.5.k for a more detailed map of disputed oil licenses).
Corruption Risks
Conflicts of interest surrounding the adoption of an Exclusive Economic Zone for Somalia (EEZ).
Qodobadii uu shir guddoonku ka akhriyey Baarlamaanka October 8, 2011 kuma aysan jirin in badda Soomaaliya lagu soo koobayo 12 mayl-badeed oo Territorial Waters ah. Laakiin.... Since 1972, Somalia has claimed an extension of its territorial sea from 12 to 200 nautical miles. However, article 3 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) limits coastal States to claim a maximum territorial sea of 12 nautical miles from the coast. Although Somalia signed UNCLOS in 1982, there has been considerable confusion over whether Somalia’s national legislation has been harmonised to give recognition to the UNCLOS regime.28 On 1 May 2013, however, President Hassan Sheikh issued a statement announcing that the FGS has identified a 1988 law which puts Somalia fully in compliance with UNCLOS, and which would allow Somalia to implement an Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), where territorial control would be limited to 12 nautical miles but where Somalia would continue to claim sovereign rights to explore, exploit, conserve and manage natural resources that exist within 200 nautical miles of its coast.
The Monitoring Group understands that Kenya suspended Norwegian oil company Statoil from block L26 in late 2012, as the company was unwilling to meet financial obligations of developing exploration activities in the block while legal uncertainty prevailed over the Kenyan-Somali maritime boundary.31 However, a Kenyan Government official has confirmed that Statoil has nevertheless expressed interest in returning to develop L26 should the maritime boundary dispute be resolved in favour of Kenya.32
The Monitoring Group has obtained information of attempts by the Norwegian Government to influence Somali parliamentarians and other FGS officials to adopt the EEZ for Somalia, which, as explained above, would lead to a separate process of redrawing of the maritime boundary towards a line of latitude.
Indeed, between 6 and 13 April 2013, two non-governmental organisations, the Oslo Center and the National Democratic Institute, hosted several Somali MPs, including the FGS speaker of parliament and Norwegian national, Mohamed Osman Jawari, on a Study Tour for the Federal Parliament of Somalia, in Oslo. The week-long programme included a briefing on the SFF by Norway’s Special Envoy to Somalia, Jens Mjuagedal, and Senior Advisor, Rina Kristmoen, as well as a briefing on Norwegian legal assistance to Somalia for the establishment of an internationally-recognized EEZ. Former Norwegian oil minister Einar Steensnaes also briefed on the issue of management of natural resources (see annex 5.5.l. for programme on page 170 of the UN S/2013/413 Report). (Note: Annex 5.5.l: is about "Programme of Study Tour of Somali MPs in Oslo 6 – 13 April 2013.")
In this way, Norway’s development assistance to Somalia may therefore be used as a cover for its commercial interests there. Norway’s Minister of International Development, Heikki Eidsvol Holmås has, however, publicly denied any link between Norway’s assistance to Somalia in establishing its continental shelf rights and any commercial oil interest.34
- Source: Somalia report of the Monitoring Group on Somalia and Eritrea - http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=S/2013/413
"Norway has for many years provided extensive assistance to Somalia both humanitarian, as well as to support efforts for peace and reconciliation and for reconstruction and development of a country who has suffered so much from hungers and wars. This has been a consistent policy aiming towards a more stable and peaceful Somalia, in which the Somali people may begin to enjoy security and hopes for a more prosperous future.
It is therefore with serious concern that we understand the Monitoring Group in its Report to the Security Council is conveying some conspiratory allegations, found on the internet, implying that Norwegian assistance to Somalia is a cover to promote the commercial interests of some Norwegian oil companies. This is both unfounded and untrue."
Adding "We are aware that the Norwegian oil company Statoil has showed some interest in possible future oil concessions in Kenya, but the Norwegian Government has always advised the company not to apply for such concessions in any areas where there may be a potential legal dispute, and when realizing that this was the case with the mentioned L26 block, Statoil decided not to get involved."MORE AT Norwegian Ministry of Foreign Affairs Website.
AKHRI: Waa Maxay Faraqa u Dhexeeya Dhul-badeedka (Territorial Sea) iyo Aagga Dhaqaalaha (EEZ)?
__________
References:
25 Kenya claims that a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) signed with Somalia’s TFG in April 2009 set the border running east along the line of latitude. However, Somalia claims that the purpose of the MoU was not to demarcate the maritime boundary but rather to grant non-objection to Kenya’s May 2009 submission of claim? to the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf to delineate the outer limits of Kenya’s continental shelf beyond the 200 nautical mile limit. (Each country’s claim requires proof of cooperation with its neighbors.) Since it was not ratified by the parliament, Somalia claimed that the MoU did not, in fact, have legal basis. Somalia’s parliament rejected this MoU in August 2009, claiming that Somalia was adhering to the appropriate requirements for delimitation of the continental shelf – not agreeing to a maritime boundary with Kenya. See Lesley Anne Warner, “East Africa’s Oil/Gas Rush Highlights Kenya- Somalia Maritime Border Dispute”, available at http://lesleyannewarner.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/east-africas-oilgas-rush-highlights-kenyasomalia-maritime-border-dispute/ . On the 6 June 2013, the Office of the Prime Minister in Somalia issued a statement saying that the council of ministers had decided that The Federal Government of Somalia does not consider it appropriate to open new discussions on maritime demarcation or limitations on the continental shelf with any parties.
26 Seehttp://www.statoil.com/annualreport2011/en/shareholderinformation/pages/majorshareholders.aspx for precise statistics on Norwegian government holdings in Statoil.
28 See Thilo Neumann and Tim Rene Salomon, “Fishing in Troubled Waters – Somalia’s Maritime Zones and the Case for Reinterpretation”, Insights, American Society of International Law, 15 March 2012.
29 According to a maritime lawyer interviewed by the Monitoring Group on 22 April 2013, should Somali MPs vote for an EEZ, the boundary would be identified through a process of negotiation between the Somali and Kenyan Governments under international mediation, and would likely shift from a perpendicular position towards a position of latitude, given previous precedent set in the East African region, particularly in relation to the Tanzanian-Kenyan maritime border.
30 Seehttp://www.garoweonline.com/artman2/publish/Somalia_27/Somalia_The_Roadmap_Gets_a_Tear_on_the_EEZ.shtml .
31 Kenyan Energy ministry Permanent Secretary, Patrick Nyoike was quoted in the financial press on 5 November 2012 as suggesting Statoil was relieved of L26 due to failing to honour a 3-D seismic development plan, seehttp://www.businessdailyafrica.com/Corporate-News/Kenya-expels-oil-giant-Statoil-from-exploration-plan-/-/539550/1612432/-/708r31z/-/index.html . However, a Kenyan Government official interviewed in April 2013, said he had been informed that Statoil did not want to take the risk of developing L26 while the maritime boundary was still in legal dispute.
32 Interview , 12 May 2013.
33 See Norwegian Foreign Ministry website: http://www.regjeringen.no/en/dep/ud/press/news/2009/shelf_assistance.html?id=555771 .
L26 was negotiated in 2012, seehttp://www.trademarksa.org/news/norwegian-firm-statoil-joins-search-oil-kenya .
34 Seehttp://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/a6d5d1b6-bd9f-11e2-a735-00144feab7de.html .
###END###
Waa Maxay Faraqa u Dhexeeya Dhul-badeedka (Territorial Sea) iyo Aagga Dhaqaalaha (EEZ)?
REMEMBER: June 6, 2013: Somali Federal Government clarifies its position on territorial waters
The government’s position is Somali Law No. 37 on the Territorial Sea and Ports, signed on 10 September 1972, which defines Somali territorial sea as 200 nautical miles and continental shelf. On 24th July 1989 Somali ratified the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. Faahfaahin
Faafin: SomaliTalk.com | July 21, 2013
Baarlamaanka Soomaaliya oo si kulul uga dooday Sharciga Cusub ee Kalluumaysiga iyo Xeerka Badda Soomaaliya ee Law No. 37
Qoraalladii Wareeggii hore ee Difaaca Badda Soomaaliya
DIFAACA BADDA: WAREEGGII-1aad 00 | 01 | 02 | 03 | 04 | 05 | 06 | 07 | 08 | 09 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | WAREEGGA-LABAAD | BAARID | SEARCH
La soo xiriir:
Xildhibaanada ka hadlay xeerka badda Soomaaliya ee Law No. 37
Sharciga cusub ee Kalluumaysiga ee horyaalla baarlamaanka Soomaaliya halkan ka eeg
Ra'iisal Wasaaraha Soomaaliya oo ka Laabtay Go'aankii Sharciga Badda ee ay Gaareen June 6, 2013?
June 15, 2013: Ra’iisul Wasaare Shirdoon oo xiiskiisa ku qaabilay R.Wasaarihii hore ee Norway
Ra'iisul Wasaare Shirdoon: Baarlamaanka ha la Weydiiyo in Dastuurka Qaranka lagu daro Xeerka Badda Soomaaliyeed ee Law No. 37
Wareegtadii Ra'iisul Wasaare Cumar C/rashiid ku wargeliyey QM in baarlamaanka Soomaaliya diideen MOU-gii badda
Jariidadda Standard oo soo Bandhigtay Caddaynta Saxiixii Labada Wasiir (Fowsiya & Aamina), kuna tilmaantay MoU ay kala saxiixdeen labada wasiir ee Arrimaha Dibadda
Xukuumada Federaaliga ah ee Soomaaliya waxay aqoonsan tahay sharciga qaran ee badaha Law No. 37. ee qeexaya dhererka xadka badda “territorial water” ee gaaraya 200 mayl-badeed iyo continental shelf . Waxay dawlada Soomaaliya ogolaatay xeerka badaha aduunka ee ay wax ka saxiixday 24kii Luuliyo 1989 ayadoo aan ka tanaasulin sharciga qaran.akhri....
SomaliTalk.com miyaa Buun-Buunisay Badda Soomaaliya, mase Fowsiya Xaaji ayaan ku Baraarugsanayn waxa ku Qoran Heshiiska ay la Saxiixday Kenya
-
The Somalis have been subdivided for a very long time let's say from the 80" in clans- communities which are fighting each other f...
-
In these last week there has been a great controversy between the ruling clique or so-called elites of the Somali Republic which have ...
-
The New POLITICAL MAP of the SOMALI Speaking People(s) of the HORN of AFRICA Part 1.Wait and see. Above you can see t... -
INTRODUCTION: On 16 June MR. Abiy Ahmed PM of Ethiopia went to visit Mogadishu as part of his new political offensive ...
-
INTRODUCTION: In this post I will try to explain from the point of view of- a Somali from Somali Republic- if it can ...
-
In these days-from 23-06-2014- is raging in the airwaves-Somali radio FM and the BBCSomali and VOASomali- the latest controversy...
-
This is comment/analysis I prepared after I have read in the internet the last UN Monitoring Group on SOMALIA and partially printed in m...
-
My Hope is UNSOM,International Community will not follow blindly the wrong policies,strategies of IGAD-AMISOM-...
-
Mr. Bryden is one of those intellectuals who obfuscated Somali issues for a very long time and are without knowing maybe implementing t...
-
T his new post is the continuation of my last article entitled " WHO Runs he Show in Somalia?.The Salafist movement......"? Here ...
