The appointment or promotion of a small number of Somali politicians to senior positions within Ethiopia’s Prosperity Party (PP) and government—including Adem Farah and Ahmed Shide—raises an important question:
Do individual appointments meaningfully address the long-standing political, institutional, territorial, and security concerns of the Somali people, or do they risk creating the appearance of inclusion without addressing deeper structural problems?
Celebrating the appointment of a Somali politician to a senior position is understandable. However, representation should not be measured only by the number of individuals occupying prominent offices. The more fundamental question is whether Somali citizens have meaningful and institutionalized influence over decisions affecting their political rights, territory, security, development, and participation in national institutions.
1. Can individual appointments address forced displacement and alleged ethnic violence?
One of the most important questions concerns the history of conflict and displacement in the Somali Region and along its borders with neighbouring regions.
There have been serious allegations and documented reporting concerning violence, displacement and inter-communal conflict affecting Somali civilians, particularly in border areas between Somali and Oromia regions. Academic research has also documented the history of violence and displacement associated with contested boundaries in eastern Ethiopia.
This raises a fundamental question:
Can the appointment of individual Somali politicians to senior government positions address these unresolved issues without institutional reforms, accountability, and guarantees against future displacement?
The history surrounding West Sitti, Garba-Issa and other conflict-affected areas deserves independent investigation and documentation rather than being reduced to partisan narratives.
Claims concerning the destruction of towns, the scale of displacement, and the involvement or responsibility of federal or regional security forces should likewise be independently verified and properly documented before definitive conclusions are reached.
2. The Somali–Oromia territorial question
Territorial disputes between the Somali and Oromia regions remain one of the most sensitive political questions in eastern Ethiopia.
The boundaries between the two regions have historically been contested, and local communities have experienced violence, displacement and uncertainty over administrative control. Academic research describes the complexity of these borderlands, including competing territorial claims and the fluidity of some local identities.
Therefore, questions concerning areas such as Fafan, Marar, Mayole, Dakasuftu and Guradamole, as well as the wider Somali–Oromia boundary, cannot simply be resolved through the appointment of individual politicians.
They require:
transparent constitutional and legal procedures;
consultation with affected communities;
credible boundary institutions;
protection of civilians;
respect for constitutional rights; and
peaceful mechanisms for resolving territorial disputes.
3. Dire Dawa and the question of constitutional status
Dire Dawa represents another particularly sensitive issue.
The city has a unique federal administrative status rather than simply belonging constitutionally to either Oromia or Somali Region. The constitutional and administrative status of Dire Dawa therefore deserves careful legal and historical examination rather than being treated as an exclusively Oromo or Somali possession.
The question for Somali political representatives should be:
Will they participate meaningfully in debates concerning Dire Dawa's constitutional status, political representation, land, administration and the rights of its diverse population?
4. Parliamentary representation: does population translate into political representation?
The question of parliamentary representation deserves serious examination.
For the 2026 electoral framework, the National Electoral Board allocated 23 House of Peoples' Representatives constituencies to Somali Region and 38 to Tigray, among other regional allocations.
However, simply comparing the number of constituencies with population figures requires caution. Ethiopia's constituency system has historical, constitutional and electoral factors, and Tigray did not hold federal elections in 2026 because of the security situation.
The broader constitutional principle nevertheless deserves public discussion. Article 54 of the Constitution establishes representation through elected members of the House of Peoples' Representatives, while Article 61 provides a separate representation framework for the House of Federation.
The central question is therefore:
Does the existing electoral and constitutional system provide Somali citizens with representation proportionate to their population and political interests?
5. Representation in the national security architecture
Political representation cannot be separated from security institutions.
A serious national question is whether all major Ethiopian communities—including Somalis—are adequately represented within:
the Ethiopian National Defence Force;
federal police;
intelligence and security institutions;
diplomatic institutions;
federal civil service;
senior economic institutions; and
national decision-making bodies.
If a major population group remains significantly underrepresented in these institutions, individual appointments at the political level cannot by themselves resolve the problem.
The objective should be inclusive national institutions, not simply the appointment of a few individuals.
6. Ethnic profiling and access to state services
Another important issue is whether Somali citizens face additional administrative or security screening when accessing government identification documents, passports or other public services.
If such practices exist, they should be examined against Ethiopia's constitutional guarantees of equality and non-discrimination and against applicable international human-rights standards.
Individuals should not be collectively punished, restricted or treated as security threats because of their ethnic or regional identity.
Security concerns may justify lawful individual screening where evidence exists, but such measures should be based on individual conduct and due process, rather than collective identity.
7. The deeper question: individual rights or group representation?
This may be the most important question of all.
Is Ethiopia's political problem primarily about individual political rights, or does the country's federal structure also require meaningful group and regional representation?
A democratic system should protect both:
Individual rights
and
Collective political and constitutional rights.
If institutions are genuinely independent, they should protect citizens regardless of ethnicity, religion, region or political affiliation.
But when institutions are weak or highly centralized, the appointment of individual representatives can become symbolic rather than transformative.
8. What should Somali political representatives be asked?
Instead of simply asking “How many Somalis have received government positions?”, the public should ask:
What have these appointments changed for Somali citizens?
Have they improved Somali representation in national institutions?
Have they addressed displacement and border conflicts?
Have they strengthened Somali participation in national security institutions?
Have they protected Somali constitutional and territorial interests?
Have they improved access to government services without discriminatory treatment?
Have they created stronger institutional mechanisms for Somali political participation?
Can individual politicians challenge policies when those policies conflict with the interests of their constituents?
Conclusion
The presence of Somali politicians in senior government positions should not automatically be interpreted either as a victory for Somali representation or as evidence of marginalization.
The real test is what those positions accomplish institutionally.
If political inclusion means simply incorporating selected individuals into an existing power structure, it may provide representation at the individual level without resolving deeper structural grievances.
If, however, political participation produces stronger institutions, equal citizenship, meaningful regional representation, protection of territorial rights, accountability for abuses, and genuine participation in national decision-making, then it can become part of a broader solution.
The central question for Somali citizens is therefore not simply:
“Who is the Somali politician appointed today?”
It is:
“What has changed for the Somali people—and what institutional guarantees exist to protect their rights tomorrow?”
Bubal Think Tank — Beyond the Headlines
