Arellano University School of Law

Public International Law

Professor: Atty. Irene D. Valones

Somaliland and its Isolation from the International

Community

Submitted by:
Acero, Dan Emmanuel R. Gonzales, Dexter Lee C.
Austria, Mykah D. Luistro, Lorenz James C.
Bato, Johaimen M. Ortega, Kimberly Mickey
Bayabao, April Z. Rabadon, Karen Joy M.
Coronel, Nikki Manuel S. Tapoc, Enn Arr A
Fernandez, Jonah U.
 TIMELINE
7th century - Islam started to make inroads into the area of modern-day
Somaliland.

14th century - The Islamic sultanates in the area came under the suzerainty of
the Christian Ethiopian Empire.

1527 - Sultanate of Adal revolted against Ethiopian rule and subsequently

conquered much of Ethiopia, before being defeated with the help of the
Portuguese in 1543.

1888 - Britain established the protectorate of British Somaliland through

treaties with the local sultanates.

1899 - Islamic cleric Mohammed Abdullah rose against British rule, and
established the Dervish State which survived until it was destroyed by British
forces in 1920.

1960 - British Somaliland and Italian Somaliland became independent and

merged into the Somali Republic.

1991 - The former British Somaliland declared unilateral independence as

Somaliland following the ousting of Somali President Mohamed Siad Barre,
which plunged the rest of Somalia into anarchy.

2001 - More than 97% of the population votes to endorse the constitution
adopted in 1997, in a referendum aimed at affirming Somaliland's self-
declared independence

2016 - Somaliland celebrated 25 years of self-declared independence, but

remains unrecognised.
I. INTRODUCTION
As the world continues to develop, the inherent capacity and character of mankind
to learn, grow and aim for a place in the society also becomes more manifest. Indeed,
it is axiomatic that nothing in this world is permanent except for change itself. The
never-ending pursuit of the people for change, progress and liberty has been the
source of many historical events, some are deemed advantageous to the general
welfare while some led to conflicts and various societal dilemmas.
The pages of history are replete with stories of struggles for independence and
acceptance by minorities who want to prove that they deserve equal respect and fair
treatment.
This has been the same tale of Somaliland for almost three decades now.
Somaliland which has been a part of Somalia since 1960 has declared its
independence since 1991 and has continued to operate within its own territory,
with a government and a growing population. However, the international
community refuses to recognize it as a sovereign state.
This paper seeks to discuss the position of Somaliland in its bid for universal
recognition in relation to pertinent principles of Public International Law. Verily, it
shall include the evolving concepts of statehood and modern notions of state
relations.

II. BACKGROUND AND HISTORY

Somaliland or what is claimed to be the Republic of Somaliland is a self-declared
state but is only recognized internationally as an autonomous region of the Federal
Republic of Somalia.
Somaliland, located in the Horn of Africa, sharing its borders with Republic of
Djibouti, Federal Republic of Ethiopia and Federal Republic of Somalia to the east,
claims that its territory has an area of 176,120 square kilometres 2 and has an
approximately four million residents. The City of Hargeisa, the largest city in
Somaliland, is considered as its capital with an approximately 1,500,000 residents3
as of March 2016.

2
Analysis: Time for jaw-jaw, not war-war in Somaliland
3
Somaliland Geography; somalilandgov.com
The Republic of Somaliland occupies the same land colonized by the British prior
to 1960. After it has gained independence, in June 1960, Somaliland became the
very first Somali country recognized by the United Nations, however, a week later,
in early July 1960, Somaliland united with Somalia Italiana to form one state with
its government seating in Mogadishu. Somalia had no history as a stable state prior
to its colonial rule, but Somaliland did, thanks in part to a significant trade axis
centered in its territory. Shortly after undertaking the union of the two states,
Somalilanders voted against the union through a unification referendum. In May
1991, following decades of attacks perpetrated by the Said Major General Mohamed
Siyad Barre regime and during extensive famine, which brought the United Nations
efforts and United States forces to Somalia, Somaliland withdrew from its union
with Somalia and moved its state capitol back to Hargeisa. A series of grassroots
reconciliation conferences have been held by Somaliland’s elders since 1992 to
resolve outstanding community conflicts across the territory. Somaliland’s
population of 3.5 million, scattered across an estimated area of 137,600 square
kilometres, is represented by men (and, as “clan ambassadors,” women) chosen by
virtue of personal attributes such as fairness and wisdom, not merely age. Over the
past decade and a half Somaliland has repatriated refugees, rebuilt war-torn
infrastructure, and demobilized rival militias.4 Despite the manifest decline in inter-
clan tension, the re-establishment of trust between communities, and its overall
success in pursuing stability and security for its population, Somaliland’s pleas for
recognition have fallen on deaf ears.5 Meanwhile, Ethiopia, by entering into bilateral
agreements for cooperation in various arenas, has gone the furthest of all states in its
unofficial recognition of Somaliland. Yemen, for inter-regional political reasons, has
also engaged in increasingly warm relations with Somaliland. Despite formal
ministerial-level meetings between Somaliland and its former colonial ruler, the
United Kingdom has resisted calls to recognize Somaliland’s independence.6 Both
the United States and the United Kingdom regard the issue of recognition as a matter
4
See Stefan Simanowitz, Democracy Comes of Age in Somaliland, 287 Contemp. Rev. 335, 336 (2005). Simanowitz
also notes that Somaliland “now boasts modern airports, hospitals, ports, power plants and universities. There is a
free press and the central bank manages an official currency with relatively stable exchange rates. An unarmed
police force and independent judiciary maintain order.” Id.
5
See Doornbos, supra note 6, at 106; Ahmed & Green, supra note 10, at 124. Dan Simpson, former U.S.
ambassador and special envoy to Somalia, agreed, at the time, that Sonaliland was a part of Somalia and should
not be recognized as an independent state. He has since changed his mind, especially now that disputes over
borders and control of the government have long been resolved. See Dan Simpson, The Ghost of Somalia:
Somaliland Should Be Allowed to Depart a Chaotic Country in Transition, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, July 12, 2006, at
B7.
6
Press Release, Republic of Somaliland, Ministry of Foreign Affairs (May 20, 2005), available at
http://www.somalilandgov.com/Edna1.htm [hereinafter Press Release]; see Doornbos, supra note 6, at 106
for the African Union, to which Somaliland applied for membership in December
2005.
Officially still part of Somalia, the region is functionally independent, but such
independence is not recognized internationally, thus, the people of Somaliland are
suffering from the complex issue of international law.
On the other hand, while awaiting recognition from the international community,
Somaliland has established its own government. The country has a republican
form of government. The government of Somaliland is composed of three
branches: (1) The Legislative; (2) The Executive; and (3) The Judiciary.
Somaliland has its own Constitution which provides for the separation of
powers of these branches of Government, each branch independently
exercising the exclusive powers accorded to it by such Constitution.
The Judicial branch of Somaliland consists of the courts and what they called
Procuracy. The judges and the members of the Procuracy, guided only by law, are
independent when exercising their judicial functions. The Republic of Somaliland’s
courts is composed of: The Supreme Court – the highest organ of the Judiciary and
is also at the same time the Constitutional Court, the Appeal Courts of the Regions,
the Regional Courts, the District Courts and the Courts of the National Armed
Forces. On the other hand, the Procuracy of the state consists of the Attorney General
and his deputies.7
Meanwhile, the Legislative Branch of the Republic of Somaliland is vested
exclusively in the Parliament which consists of two Houses – the House of
Representatives and the House of the Elders. The power to legislate cannot be
transferred to anyone outside the Parliament. All bills passed by the Parliament only
come into force when the President publishes them in accordance with the
Constitution. The Parliament fulfils its duties in accordance with the Constitution
and its Rules. 8
The Executive Branch (sometimes referred to as “the Government”), is headed by
the elected President9, it also has a Vice-President, and Council of Ministers
appointed by the President. The Somaliland Ministries is considered as the ultimate

7
Our Government; somalilandgov.com
8
As above, 7
9
Somaliland History; somalilandgov.com
decision making body of the Executive Branch, and are formed to carry out the
operations of the Government’s Departments.

III. WHEN IS A STATE A STATE

The Montevideo Convention, which sets out the definition, rights and duties of
statehood, provides that for a state to be considered as a person of international law,
it should possess the following qualifications: 10
(a) Permanent Population – refers to the human beings living within a specified
territory. It should be of both sexes and sufficient in number to maintain and
perpetuate themselves;
(b) Defined Territory – the fixed portion of the surface of the earth in which the
people of the state reside. It is necessary for jurisdictional reasons and in order to
provide for the needs of its inhabitants. It should be big enough to be self-sufficient
and small enough to be easily administered and defended;
(c) Government – the agency through which the will of the state is formulated,
expressed and realized;11
(d) Capacity to enter into relations with other states –also attributed as independence
or sovereignty which includes the freedom from outside control in the conduct of its
foreign and internal affairs. 12
However, there are debates taking place as to whether the satisfaction of the
aforementioned requirements of the Montevideo Convention alone would suffice for
an entity to be considered a State, or if recognition is also necessary. There are two
conflicting theories as regards recognition of a state: (1) The Declarative Theory of
Statehood; and (2) The Constitutive Theory of Statehood.
The declarative theory of statehood provides that the moment in which an entity
satisfies all the conditions set out in the Montevideo convention, the entity is a
State.13 It was explicitly stated in the said convention that the political existence of
the state is independent of recognition by the other states14, yet, it fails to adequately

10
Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States
11
Cruz, I. (2003); “International Law”; Central Lawbook Publishing Co. Inc. pp. 30-31
12
Nachura, A. &Gatdula, J. (2017), Outline Introduction to Public International Law; Rex Bookstore
13
What Makes A State; thenewinternationallaw.com
14
Article 3, Montevideo Convention on the Rights and Duties of States
explain the creation of “States” in international practice. There are entities in the
world that de facto satisfy the Criteria of the Montevideo convention but do not as a
general matter benefit from being “States” and do not receive or benefit from the
rights that come with such status.15
In contrast, the constitutive theory of statehood defines a state as a subject of
international law if, and only if, it is recognized as sovereign by other states16, in this
theory, even if the state possesses the aforementioned requirements, it would still
not suffice for a state to be regarded as having international personality as in this
theory recognition is an essential ingredient.
Most treatises of international law still describe the ‘declaratory theory’ as the
dominant doctrine governing state practice.17

IV. CREATION OF STATE

There are different modes accepted under international law for the birth and/or
creation of states such as by revolution, unification, secession, assertion of
independence, agreement and attainment of civilization.18
Until 1914, secession, which is defined as the creation of state by separation from a
former sovereign, was the most widely known mode in the creation of states.19 This
notwithstanding, there have been many debates whether a right of secession based
from the right to self-determination actually exists. As early as 1920, the League of
Nations has already declared that it does not recognize the right of minority groups
to separate themselves from the state from which they form a part just by the simple
expression of a wish.20
In modern International Law, the right to self-determination is recognized even by
the United Nations, but it does not include the right to secession. However, secession
is tolerated as a matter of last resort in situations where the people are being

15
As above, 6
16
Hillier, Tim (1998); Sourcebook on Public International Law
17
Cited in Walter et.al. (2014). The Role of Recognition and Non-Recognition with Regard to Secession
18
Nachura, A. &Gatdula, J. (2017), Outline Introduction to Public International Law; Rex Bookstore
19
Crawford, J. (2018).The creation of states in International Law; Oxford University Press
20
League of Nations OJ (1920) as cited by Eastwood, L.; Secession: State Practice and International Law After the
Dissolution of the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia
oppressed or when the government does not legitimately and adequately represent
their interests.21

V. SOMALILAND’S PERSPECTIVE
Based from the above-mentioned principles of International Law, the Government
of Somaliland strongly argues that, as a matter of right, they should be considered
as a sovereign state. As posted on their official website, it claims that it
unequivocally complied all the established legal criterion to be considered as a State
under the Montevideo convention, to wit:

a. A permanent population
 The Republic of Somaliland has a population of approximately 3.5
million. Its capital Hargeisa has a permanent population estimated at
1.1 million.
 The nomadic nature of many of Somaliland’s inhabitants, and the
consequent flow of the population in and out of the territory, has no
impact on the legal definition of permanent population.
b. A defined territory
 The British protectorate established clearly defined borders for
Somaliland by treaties in the 19th century. These borders were
confirmed upon Somaliland’s declaration of independence in 1960.
 The contention of the eastern border does not invalidate statehood.
c. Effective government
 Somaliland has a central government which exercises effective control
over the majority of its territory. It held internationally recognized free
and fair election, most recently in June 2010. Moreover, it has effective
government institutions including a constitution approved by a popular
vote, a democratically elected President, national parliament, local
governments, and an independent judiciary.

d. Capacity to enter into relations with other States

 Despite being unrecognized, Somaliland has entered into informal and
formal relationships with a number of other states, including the United

21
Sterio, M. (2018). Self-Determination and Secession Under International Law: The Cases of Kurdistan and
Catalonia; www.asil.org
 Kingdom, Sweden, the United States, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Kenya.
Also, it has achieved a “de facto” recognition from a number of other
nations around the world.22

Furthermore, it is interesting to note that Somaliland has its own currency, a well-
trained military and has successfully conducted its own presidential and
parliamentary elections since 2002 and 2005 respectively.

In stark contrast, the Somalian Government remains to be unstable due to the

continuous civil war initiated by rebel groups.

VI. INTERNATIONAL ENGAGEMENT

Another key argument of Somaliland is its continuing growth in terms of

international engagement. The international experts who are in favor of the
recognition of Somaliland and changing the status quo have undeniably increased in
numbers.23

In fact, the South African Department of Foreign Affairs released a statement in

2003 unequivocally expressing their legal opinion in favour of the recognition of
Somaliland. They particularly said that “…Somaliland does indeed qualify for
statehood, and it is incumbent on the international community to recognize it. Any
efforts to deny or delay would not only put the international community at risk of
ignoring the most stable region in the Horn, it would impose untold hardship upon
the people of Somaliland due to the denial of foreign assistance that recognition
entails.” They further stated that:

“The interest of world peace and stability require that, where possible,
the division or fragmentation of existing states should be managed
peacefully and by negotiation. But where this is not possible, as is the
case with Somalia, international law accepts that the interests of justice
may prevail over the principle of territorial integrity.” 24

Furthermore, in 2005, a fact-finding mission to Somaliland was sent by the African

Union which described the case of Somaliland as unique, and which should be judged
“from an objective historical viewpoint and a moral angle vis-à-vis the aspirations of

22
The Legal Case, The Recognition of Somaliland; somalilandgov.com
23
International Engagement, The Recognition of Somaliland; somalilandgov.com
24
id
the people”. The fact-finding mission recommended that the African Union should
find a special method suitable to deal with the special case of Somaliland.

Moreover, the fact-finding mission also concluded that the status of Somaliland
cannot be likened to the ‘notion of Opening of Pandora’s Box’ in Africa which might
later on introduce and set bigger and greater problems.25 This is due to the
apprehension of many organizations that its triumphant secession might lead to a
dangerous precedent among other rebel organizations to put up resistance with their
governments in order to claim independence.26

However, even the International Crisis Group, an independent organization working

to prevent wars and shape policies that will build a more peaceful world27 published
a report in 2006 which regarded the issue of recognition as an existential matter and
sovereignty as a matter of identity. The report also asked whether it is fair to hold
“Somaliland hostage to events over which it has very little control”, rather than
rewarding the country for “creating stability and democratic governance out of a part
of the chaos that is the failed state of Somalia.” 28

The report warned that “The African Union’s challenge is to provide timely, neutral
leadership in order to ensure a just, peaceful and enduring settlement, before
confrontation and violence becomes the only option imaginable by both parties.” The
crisis group further recommended that Somaliland should be given an African Union
observer “interim status analogous to the observer status it has granted 31 non-
African states or the status of the Palestinian Authority at the UN”.

Eventually, after the first fact-finding mission sent by the African Union in 2005,
another fact-finding mission was sent in 2008. The mission found the same
conclusion as the first one, that the Somalilanders had a unified claim that their
country has an irreversible independence and outright rejection of the notion with
Somalia. As a result, Louise Arbor, the president and CEO of International Crisis
Group recommended that the international community should provide institutional
capacity building support to Somaliland infrastructure and facilitate its access to the

25
id
26
Pijovic, N. (2014). To Be or Not to Be: Rethinking the Possible Repercussions of Somaliland’s International
Statehood Recognition. African Studies Quarterly V. 4 Iss. 14
27
https://www.crisisgroup.org/
28
International Engagement, The Recognition of Somaliland; somalilandgov.com
international and regional financial institution and banking system, as a peace
dividend.

Arbour further elucidated that it is the continuous attempts to re-impose centralized

control of Somalia over Somaliland which may lead to another chapter in the Somali
Civil War. He believes that the abstract notion of the unity and territorial integrity of
Somalia is both unrealistic and unsupported by more than twenty years of state
practice. Independence is the only lasting possible solution.29

In 2011, Brenthurst Foundation, a Johannesburg-based think-tank foundation,

published a study report focusing on the consequence of international recognition of
Somaliland. The report clearly stated that the recognition of Somaliland “…would
be a most cost-effective means to ensure security in an otherwise troubled and
problematic region.” The report pointed out the irony of international community in
denying itself the opportunity to extend the reach of global governance in a way that
it would be beneficial to itself.

Aside from the mentioned international groups and unions, Somaliland has been
effective and active in strengthening its relations in the different countries. As a
matter of fact, the Somaliland has been engaging into formal and informal
relationships with United States of America, Canada, United Kingdom, Sweden,
France, Norway, Belguim, Ethopia,Djibouti, Ghana, Kenya, South Sudan, South
Africa and Yemen. Somaliland has successfully established offices in such countries.
It has also achieved de facto recognition with numerous states around the world. In
addition, Somaliland passport is now accepted by South Africa, Kenya, Djibouti and
Ethiopia.

Somaliland has formally applied to join the African Union, however, the application
is still pending. Meanwhile, in 2010, the African Union Peace and Security Council
directed the AU Commission Chairperson to ‘broaden consultations with Somaliland
and Puntland”.

Also, while it is true that the United nations still has not accepted Somaliland as a
member state, it has nevertheless established 18 UN Agencies within its territories
including the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations
Population Fund (UNPF), the Joint United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS
(UNAIDS), United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), United

29
id
Nations Children’s Funds (UNICEF), World Health Organization (WHO) and World
Food Programme (WFP). The UN Envoy to Somalia has repeatedly visited
Hargeisha, the supposed capital of Somaliland.30

In January 2007, the European Union sent a delegation for foreign affairs to
Somaliland to discuss future cooperation. In November 2007, Annemie Neyts-
Uyttebroeck MEP, President of the European Liberal Democrat and Reform Party
introduced a conditional resolution calling on the EU and all its member states to
give diplomatic recognition to Somaliland. During a visit to Somaliland in July 2011
in which he met with President Silanyo, EU Commissioner for Development, Andris
Piebalgs announced additional funds to support economic development, education
and governance in Somaliland.

In 2012, President Ahmad Silanyo held talks with his Somali counterpart, Sharif
Sheikh Ahmad, in London, Istanbul and Dubai. The Dubai discussions in June 2012
led to the joint signing of the Dubai Charter to reinforce “international efforts for
reconciliation among all Somali parties”. Ahead of talks, the government managed
to persuade Parliament to suspend an existing law that had explicitly forbidden the
government from entering a dialogue with Mogadishu.31

In June 2007, Ethiopia was the first foreign government to officially refer to
Somaliland as a sovereign state and its President as Head of State during a
conference. Ethiopia has an established office and diplomatic Counsellor in
Hargeisa. Somaliland and Ethiopia have close trade ties – the port at Berbera is the
second-most important harbour, after Djibouti, for imports to and exports from
landlocked Ethiopia. Also, Ethiopian Airways has regular scheduled flights to
Berbera.
As for the United Stated of America, it is worth noting that it was one of the 35
countries that formally recognized the state of Somaliland when it declared
independence for five days in 1960. It has retained relations with Somaliland as
evidenced by Former US Assistant Secretary of State, Jendayei Frazer’s visit to
Somaliland in February 2008. Furthermore, Former Somaliland President Dahir
Riyale Kahin was warmly received on a visit to the US in April 2008 to broaden
support towards the goal of recognition.

30
International Engagement, The Recognition of Somaliland; somalilandgov.com
31
Id.
In May 2012, Somaliland Foreign Minister Mohamed Omar led a high-level
delegation including cabinet members, members of parliament and representatives
of Somaliland’s business, media and academic communities to participate in a two-
day Somaliland Conference in Northern Virginia. US military officials, including
Navy Capt. Bob Wright, head of strategic communication for the Combined Joint
Task Force Horn of Africa, have said they are eager to engage Somaliland.32

In an interview with Saad Ali Shire Ph. D., the Minister of Foreign Affairs and
International Cooperation for Somaliland, he shared that in 2016, he had continually
visited 13 countries across Asia, Europe, Africa and Middle East, one of which is
Egypt. He further said that they have a significant student community in Egypt for
higher learning and that their trade relations with them has remained strong over the
years.33

VII. Why the International Community Refuses Recognition

As mentioned above, the main reason why many countries and organizations are still
in doubt of granting the recognition that Somaliland seeks is the fear of causing a
perilous precedent likened to the opening of the Pandora’s Box.

Many are apprehensive that the secessionist move of Somaliland will encourage
other clans and rebel organizations into moving for its own independence. It must be
emphasized that the region of Somaliland consists of culturally diverse clans and
provinces.

Furthermore, the decrease in the Power of Somalian Federal Government,

Mogadishu, may revive hostilities between the North and South while also reigniting
old tensions between Somalis and Ethiopians. 34

Moreover, as was discussed earlier, secession is only approved in the international

context as a last resort, when the government refuses to recognize and protect the
interests of its people. In the case of Somaliland, the Somalian Federal Government
continues to exert efforts towards unification and does not relinquish its authority
over Somaliland as an autonomous region.

32
International Engagement, The Recognition of Somaliland; somalilandgov.com
33
The Pending Case of Somaliland’s Recognition. https://www.thereporterethiopia.com
34
T.G. (2015) https://www.economist.com
VII. CONCLUSION

Recognition in international law bestows a plethora of both responsibilities and

rights to recognized states. More often than not, recognition is not merely applying
the relevant legal matrix to a factual situation for sometimes a State might not want
the consequences of recognition to follow. For instance, USA for a long period of
time did not recognize People’s Republic of China despite its knowledge of the
obvious fact that effective control was exercised over this defined territory; mainly
because it did not want the legal consequences of recognition to come into effect.
Considering the foregoing statements, one can instantly identify that the only
debilitating factor preventing the recognition of Somaliland is the fear of some states
for the possible outbreak of more civil wars as well aggrandizement of rebel groups
who may tend to advance the same agenda of creating their own states for their own
independence. However, it is noteworthy that this fear is of a futuristic in form and
seemingly not having a logical explanation as to how it differs from other states
which were recognized through revolutions.

Amongst the two theories with regard to the nature of recognition, is the constitutive
theory which stems the importance of recognition as an essential element for a new
state to be a full-fledged subject of international law. Whereas, the declaratory theory
which has a more pragmatic footing stipulates that a new state will be a subject of
international law by its own efforts and will not have to depend on the will or
recognition of the other states. If the declaratory theory is to be applied on it, then it
shall indeed be correct to say that Somaliland is an independent state capable of
enjoying the rights and duties bestowed by international law. It is undisputed that
the Somaliland or as they appropriately call it as the Republic of Somaliland
possesses the essential elements of a state. It apparently has a fixed territory over
which its people reside, run by a republican government and exercise sovereignty by
virtue of the creation of its three branches of government namely executive,
legislative, and judiciary. The concurrence of these elements, according to
Declarative Theory which is the most accepted one, shall constitute the creation of
a state.

Moreover, the Republic of Somaliland has indubitably entered into formal and
informal international relations with other states such as United Kingdom, Sweden,
United States of America, Djibouti, Ethiopia and Kenya. This shows that the same,
although not being recognized buy some states, has exercised its right to enter into
international transactions which impliedly gave the impression of its recognition in
the international sphere.

Therefore, it is not in accordance with the set standards and rules to afford the notion
of declaring the Republic of Somaliland not a state due to the failure of other states
to extend their recognition to the former because of their own reservations and
political issues over the matter. Hence, the Republic of Somaliland must be treated
with all the rights and respects afforded to a state under international law and not
merely as an autonomous region.