General Samantar and his colleagues had been running the country, from tea boy to president. Late 1969 they took over, and further strengthened, one of the strongest military army in
During the regime’s era they have practiced the legitimacy to rule the country in their own terms from south to north. During this time many injustices had been done; many people were killed with no legal ground, many were denied the rights of employment, many citizens’ property or assets were either destroyed or confiscated. Many foreign businesses were nationalized without taking the proper channels. The people’s concern of injustice, the proliferation of tribalism and favoritism had been ignored and allowed to prosper. The freedom of expression had been denied. The basic education had been neglected and abandoned. The wrongs had replaced the rights and the Somali citizens frantically struggled to find alternatives, in most cases, violently.
Ultimately, after years of death and destruction coupled by torturous and traumatic experience and the continuous failure of the leadership in all areas of government, the
Now the Question is who should be held responsible for this State failure and its consequence? Is it Qanyare, Suudi Yallahow, Aideed, or Omar Finish and alike. No. None of these individuals are, in my view, responsible to what happened in
Now, to come to the point of the discussion, is General Samantar at least partially responsible to what happened to us and our land?
In short, Ali Samantar, as I said earlier, was a member of the Politburo (the sole decision makers of the nation), first vice-president, and the Minister of Defense. The Ministry of Defense was responsible for the execution of all illegal and evil actions that the Somali government has carried out against its people. Ali Samantar and his apparatus in the army had the implicit mandate to kill, destroy, arrest and carry out all the terrorizing acts that the Somali people had experienced during Samantar’s era in the Ministry. The military machine carried out all the summary executions that took place in
One may ask and argue about the difference between Ali Samantar and Yallahow, one of the notorious Somali warlords, who is now enjoying his new title, so-called the ‘Member of Parliament’. The simple answer is Ali Samantar was educated, trained, employed, crowned with the Somali flag, empowered and sworn in to serve the Somali people by a Somali Government. In other words, Samantar had statutory authority. In contrary, Suudi Yallahow has emerged from the dust and the debris that Ali Samantar and his colleagues had left behind, and he unskillfully struggled to survive in that mayhem. However, that will not absolve him (Yallahow) from any wrong doing, even though no one has entrusted him any responsibility and he never received a mandate or directive from anyone.
Therefore, legally and rationally General Mohamed Ali Samantar should be held responsible not only the crimes that his lieutenants committed in his Ministry but what happened to
Confusingly, despite all this empirical evidence, some people are defending Ali Samantar and helping him financially to challenge against the people whose loved ones he (Ali Samantar) has killed. If history has any significance in this context; Milosevic, Pol Pot, Hitler, and the Rwandese perpetrators have not pulled the trigger, but they were legally hunted down purely because of their statutory authority and what their lieutenants had committed in their respective countries. Is General Samantar different from them!!! Or are the defenders just victims of Stockholm syndrome[1].
Sadly, this defense exercise, in favor of the General, will have colossal political and social dimensions in
The political dimension concerns the facts that the union of the South and the North was based on brotherhood and common interest. If the southerners are so openly defending a man who is seen by the northerners the killer of their children, mums and dads unlawfully, then obviously the northerners will be left nothing but to conclude that this is a conspiracy against northern inhabitants. And it will definitely, in the long term, diminish the trust, if any, between the two parts.
The social dimension, applies the rights of the citizen and what someone can or cannot do in
In conclusion, I sincerely believe, that anyone who has been victimized should have the opportunity to take his alleged villain to the court without any obstruction, where the defendant has the right to respond to the raised allegations. Anything different from this process will surely make us a jungle-society that should apply the law of the jungle.
Omar Mohamud Farah (Dhollawaa)
[1] A phenomenon in which a hostage begins to identify with and grow sympathetic to his or her captor.
No comments:
Post a Comment