UK - Somalia must recognize first.

[Khalid Ali]

There is absolutely no such thing as a federal govt in Somalia there is a small amisom ngo project set up America and the west . To protect Kenyan and Ethiopian security interest but there is no such thing as a govt inside somalia. Somalis Italians ceased to exist in1991 the same year the cancerous union was dissolved in 1991.

[X.Playa]

“We believe that it is for the Federal Government of Somalia and Somaliland to reach agreement on their future together, and that it is for those in the region to take the lead in recognising the resulting agreement,” a UK Foreign Office spokeswoman told the Financial Times in response to questions. 

That message is consistent across western governments, said Ahmed Soliman, a Horn of Africa expert at Chatham House in London. “Until there are formal discussions between Mogadishu and Hargeisa, endorsed by the African Union or other regional players, it is unlikely that any country would take the final step [of recognising Somaliland],” he said.

---

What now for the SNM aka Qudhmis?

discuss.

If you read exactly what you posted it belies your own assertion now. The world did not say Somalia has the power to recognize Somaliland or visa versa the world said that both entites should decide their future seprate or together through dialoge, and the rest of the world will abide by whatever result .

Somalia i.e. the Federal Republic of Somalia transformed from the original Somali Republi

No it can't , if Somaliland decide to rejoin the union that official name " somalia" will have to be changed , since Somalia only referes to one part of the union.

Legally this transition is not void because the Act of Union created the Somali Republic not the constitution - there is a difference

.

There was and is no act of union . The answer to that part is very simple.

Hence, the sovereignty of the former British Protectorate which it voluntarily relinquished and transferred to the Somali Republic is today possessed by the current federal governmen.

where did Somaliland ever relinquished its soverignty to modern Somalia??? don't make up words and with it a new history and revisionsim . Somaliland and Somalia joined together forming a united state called the Somali Republic, how can that be called " relinquishing" anything? and if relinquishing is your key word, we can also argue logically that Italian Somalia by joining Somaliland and thus creating the new Somali Republic that they have relinquished their and transefered their soverignty also. Why not apply your twisted logic to Somalia also?? oh i fogot your Daaroodism and hate again is clouding your judgment.

For the current Republic of Somaliland to become independent the Federal Government of Somalia must agree to forsake and renounce its claim to its north western territory because after all sovereignty is vested in it. So, told Somaliland is no different to Puntland or Jubaland.

Again your logic is silly and groundless , Somaliland is not and was not part of this "somalia" , Somaliland and Somalia were equal parteners creating a union so thus Italian Somalia has no claim over somaliland , what italian somalia has claim over is mainting the union whereas Somaliland is opting for disolving the union , there is no territroial claim since Somalia an Italian colony and Somaliland a British colony were not part of one another .

The world is unequivocally declaring that for Somaliland to gain recognition it must first open dialogue with Somalia and Somalia via that dialogue must agree to recognize Somaliland as equal sovereign state. Thus if Somalia refuses to grant this recognition, there is no option for Somaliland to but to remain as part of Somalia. This global decree contradicts what Somalilanders have argued for the last 30 years which was 'recognition will be conferred on as with or without Somalia's approval'. For this its accepted that the world desires for Somaliland follow the same route as South Sudan, Eritrea and Timor-Leste were the parent country granted Independence after many decades of struggling to gain independence.

Somalia would not only be recognizing Somaliland it would also be granting it independence. Which are two different legal principles.

You seem to be stuck on the name 'Somalia' - countries change the names all the time, most recently Swaziland changed its name . When determining the de jure existence of a sovereign independent state you have to look at how it was created in law. As I explained the Somali Republic was created in law (as a legal entity) when the British Somaliland Protectorate and 'Trust Territory of Somaliland under Italian administration' became the State of Somaliland and the State of Somalia respectively and unified to become the Somali Republic by passing the Act of Union. They both relinquished their sovereignty.

The Somali Republic was created as a legal entity for the moment when both parliaments of Somaliland and Somalia passed the Act of Union (although some argue the act wasn't passed correctly, but that's an issue for another discussion).

Here you can find the Act of Union - https://www.hiiraan.com/news4/2013/july ... a_law.aspx

Therefore, both Somaliland an Italian Somaliland ceased to exist in law. They both have no legal claims to gain back sovereignty because the Act of Union didn't stipulate they can gain back sovereignty when ever they wished (if they weren't happy with the union). So, its not Italian Somalia that is denying the modern day Somaliland recognition and Independence its the Somali Republic which happened to change its name to the Federal Republic of Somalia. The legal entity of The Somali Republic going forward from its creation in 1960 was free and entitled to change its name, constitution and territorial bounders if it wished.

So, Somaliland today is a de facto state (existing in reality) but not in law - Legally its part of the Somalia. And since its legally part of Somalia international law allows Somalia to either renounce its claims to the Somaliland territory or keep it as part of this territorial sovereignty.

This is nothing to do with Darod its simple international law.

You are still going in circles just dressing your basic arguments in different colors , but your contention is the same. Now at last you backed off your ridiculous claim of the world demanding Somalia recognize Somaliland and instead you changed the wording into dialogue. Not bad at all , at least we are getting somewhere.

Italian Somalia is never asked to recognize somaliland , not even somaliland asks for such a thing , what somaliland did and demands is a disolution of the failed union. Italian Somalia will not recognize somaliland because somaliland was not and is not part of iatlain somalia , its rather its partner in the former somali republic. words and official names of somali regions are very important , most of the faqash and Walaweyns , use somalia , Somali republic interchangeably , which is wrong, its like using Somaliland and Somali Republic referring to Hargaysa and SL government. Somaliland and Somalia have to talk at some point , if that talk fails and continue to fail then the statue quo will remain in effect to eternity, Somaliland will never ever give up its sovereignty for a Hawiye/Daarood duopoly of power. Somaliland for 28 years didn't change nor softened its stand , what makes you think they will change their stand, when they are wining and getting more influence economically and politically.?

Again on your last point , there was no act of union , Somaliland's Parliament passed its own act of union , and the Somalia assembly never voted on an act of union , so both of acts of union are void.

I know you are trying hard to safe guard your Daaroodism by inventing a country that never existed which is Somalia , somalia never existed as a country , it was an Italian colony and on July 1 1960 Somalia became the Somali Republic with Somaliland , at least Somaliland was Somaliland for almost a week. Words do matter , you calling Somaliland somalia is like me calling Italian Somalia , Somaliland. Its tottaly inaccurate. Even using the term Somaliland for Italian Somalia is grounded in ignorance , the British called Italian Somalia ( Italian Somaliland) but the Walaweyn and Faqsh in the south never refereed to them selves as Somaliland but rather somalia. so we should be very careful using the correct names for both territories.

[Sharmarke91]

If you read exactly what you posted it belies your own assertion now. The world did not say Somalia has the power to recognize Somaliland or visa versa the world said that both entites should decide their future seprate or together through dialoge, and the rest of the world will abide by whatever result .


No it can't , if Somaliland decide to rejoin the union that official name " somalia" will have to be changed , since Somalia only referes to one part of the union.

.

There was and is no act of union . The answer to that part is very simple.



where did Somaliland ever relinquished its soverignty to modern Somalia??? don't make up words and with it a new history and revisionsim . Somaliland and Somalia joined together forming a united state called the Somali Republic, how can that be called " relinquishing" anything? and if relinquishing is your key word, we can also argue logically that Italian Somalia by joining Somaliland and thus creating the new Somali Republic that they have relinquished their and transefered their soverignty also. Why not apply your twisted logic to Somalia also?? oh i fogot your Daaroodism and hate again is clouding your judgment.

For the current Republic of Somaliland to become independent the Federal Government of Somalia must agree to forsake and renounce its claim to its north western territory because after all sovereignty is vested in it. So, told Somaliland is no different to Puntland or Jubaland.

Again your logic is silly and groundless , Somaliland is not and was not part of this "somalia" , Somaliland and Somalia were equal parteners creating a union so thus Italian Somalia has no claim over somaliland , what italian somalia has claim over is mainting the union whereas Somaliland is opting for disolving the union , there is no territroial claim since Somalia an Italian colony and Somaliland a British colony were not part of one another .

The world is unequivocally declaring that for Somaliland to gain recognition it must first open dialogue with Somalia and Somalia via that dialogue must agree to recognize Somaliland as equal sovereign state. Thus if Somalia refuses to grant this recognition, there is no option for Somaliland to but to remain as part of Somalia. This global decree contradicts what Somalilanders have argued for the last 30 years which was 'recognition will be conferred on as with or without Somalia's approval'. For this its accepted that the world desires for Somaliland follow the same route as South Sudan, Eritrea and Timor-Leste were the parent country granted Independence after many decades of struggling to gain independence.

Somalia would not only be recognizing Somaliland it would also be granting it independence. Which are two different legal principles.

You seem to be stuck on the name 'Somalia' - countries change the names all the time, most recently Swaziland changed its name . When determining the de jure existence of a sovereign independent state you have to look at how it was created in law. As I explained the Somali Republic was created in law (as a legal entity) when the British Somaliland Protectorate and 'Trust Territory of Somaliland under Italian administration' became the State of Somaliland and the State of Somalia respectively and unified to become the Somali Republic by passing the Act of Union. They both relinquished their sovereignty.

The Somali Republic was created as a legal entity for the moment when both parliaments of Somaliland and Somalia passed the Act of Union (although some argue the act wasn't passed correctly, but that's an issue for another discussion).

Here you can find the Act of Union - https://www.hiiraan.com/news4/2013/july ... a_law.aspx

Therefore, both Somaliland an Italian Somaliland ceased to exist in law. They both have no legal claims to gain back sovereignty because the Act of Union didn't stipulate they can gain back sovereignty when ever they wished (if they weren't happy with the union). So, its not Italian Somalia that is denying the modern day Somaliland recognition and Independence its the Somali Republic which happened to change its name to the Federal Republic of Somalia. The legal entity of The Somali Republic going forward from its creation in 1960 was free and entitled to change its name, constitution and territorial bounders if it wished.

So, Somaliland today is a de facto state (existing in reality) but not in law - Legally its part of the Somalia. And since its legally part of Somalia international law allows Somalia to either renounce its claims to the Somaliland territory or keep it as part of this territorial sovereignty.

This is nothing to do with Darod its simple international law.

You are still going in circles just dressing your basic arguments in different colors , but your contention is the same. Now at last you backed off your ridiculous claim of the world demanding Somalia recognize Somaliland and instead you changed the wording into dialogue. Not bad at all , at least we are getting somewhere.

Italian Somalia is never asked to recognize somaliland , not even somaliland asks for such a thing , what somaliland did and demands is a disolution of the failed union. Italian Somalia will not recognize somaliland because somaliland was not and is not part of iatlain somalia , its rather its partner in the former somali republic. words and official names of somali regions are very important , most of the faqash and Walaweyns , use somalia , Somali republic interchangeably , which is wrong, its like using Somaliland and Somali Republic referring to Hargaysa and SL government. Somaliland and Somalia have to talk at some point , if that talk fails and continue to fail then the statue quo will remain in effect to eternity, Somaliland will never ever give up its sovereignty for a Hawiye/Daarood duopoly of power. Somaliland for 28 years didn't change nor softened its stand , what makes you think they will change their stand, when they are wining and getting more influence economically and politically.?

Again on your last point , there was no act of union , Somaliland's Parliament passed its own act of union , and the Somalia assembly never voted on an act of union , so both of acts of union are void.

I know you are trying hard to safe guard your Daaroodism by inventing a country that never existed which is Somalia , somalia never existed as a country , it was an Italian colony and on July 1 1960 Somalia became the Somali Republic with Somaliland , at least Somaliland was Somaliland for almost a week. Words do matter , you calling Somaliland somalia is like me calling Italian Somalia , Somaliland. Its tottaly inaccurate. Even using the term Somaliland for Italian Somalia is grounded in ignorance , the British called Italian Somalia ( Italian Somaliland) but the Walaweyn and Faqsh in the south never refereed to them selves as Somaliland but rather somalia. so we should be very careful using the correct names for both territories.

Maybe you misunderstood me, I don't how, I made it clear enough. Somaliland is a territory that is part of Somalia or the Somali Republic (whichever name you like). Thus, Somalia must cede its territory (Somaliland) and grant it Independence. Once this is done the world will recognize Somaliland as an independent state OR Somalia can withhold granting independence (which is the likely possibility) and Somaliland will remain part of Somalia. That is simply what the IC is saying.

Its clear this is beyond your limited comprehension. Ignore qabiil and history for a second and focus on the law that established the Somali Republic.

Once Somaliland and Somalia meet to discuss their differences, It will not be about dissolving the union it would be about whether Somalia is willing to grant Somaliland independence. Why is this you may ask?!

Simple because there was not provisions made in the Act of Union in the event that either party would want the union dissolved. Thus both entities of Somaliland and Italian Somaliland ceased to exist - they are no more!

British Somaliland passed the LAW OF UNION BETWEEN SOMALILAND AND SOMALIA: Law No: 1 of 1960.

Italian Somaliland approved an Act of Union (atto di unione).

They were two different but very similar acts. It was due to ignorance the acts weren't passed correctly.

However, the problem was seen early and the Act of Union 1961 was created. The act applies retrospectively from the day the union was created on 1 july 1960.

Act of Union 1961 - http://www.somalilandlaw.com/Act_of_Uni ... y_1961.pdf

This is the legally binding document. Thus, the state of Somaliland and the State of Somalia do not exist anymore.

So, how can the current Somaliland dissolve the union? Italian Somalialnd doesn't exist legally nor does the State of Somaliland.

Shouldn't it be asking for Independence?

[X.Playa]

The world is unequivocally declaring that for Somaliland to gain recognition it must first open dialogue with Somalia and Somalia via that dialogue must agree to recognize Somaliland as equal sovereign state. Thus if Somalia refuses to grant this recognition, there is no option for Somaliland to but to remain as part of Somalia. This global decree contradicts what Somalilanders have argued for the last 30 years which was 'recognition will be conferred on as with or without Somalia's approval'. For this its accepted that the world desires for Somaliland follow the same route as South Sudan, Eritrea and Timor-Leste were the parent country granted Independence after many decades of struggling to gain independence.

Somalia would not only be recognizing Somaliland it would also be granting it independence. Which are two different legal principles.

You seem to be stuck on the name 'Somalia' - countries change the names all the time, most recently Swaziland changed its name . When determining the de jure existence of a sovereign independent state you have to look at how it was created in law. As I explained the Somali Republic was created in law (as a legal entity) when the British Somaliland Protectorate and 'Trust Territory of Somaliland under Italian administration' became the State of Somaliland and the State of Somalia respectively and unified to become the Somali Republic by passing the Act of Union. They both relinquished their sovereignty.

The Somali Republic was created as a legal entity for the moment when both parliaments of Somaliland and Somalia passed the Act of Union (although some argue the act wasn't passed correctly, but that's an issue for another discussion).

Here you can find the Act of Union - https://www.hiiraan.com/news4/2013/july ... a_law.aspx

Therefore, both Somaliland an Italian Somaliland ceased to exist in law. They both have no legal claims to gain back sovereignty because the Act of Union didn't stipulate they can gain back sovereignty when ever they wished (if they weren't happy with the union). So, its not Italian Somalia that is denying the modern day Somaliland recognition and Independence its the Somali Republic which happened to change its name to the Federal Republic of Somalia. The legal entity of The Somali Republic going forward from its creation in 1960 was free and entitled to change its name, constitution and territorial bounders if it wished.

So, Somaliland today is a de facto state (existing in reality) but not in law - Legally its part of the Somalia. And since its legally part of Somalia international law allows Somalia to either renounce its claims to the Somaliland territory or keep it as part of this territorial sovereignty.

This is nothing to do with Darod its simple international law.

You are still going in circles just dressing your basic arguments in different colors , but your contention is the same. Now at last you backed off your ridiculous claim of the world demanding Somalia recognize Somaliland and instead you changed the wording into dialogue. Not bad at all , at least we are getting somewhere.

Italian Somalia is never asked to recognize somaliland , not even somaliland asks for such a thing , what somaliland did and demands is a disolution of the failed union. Italian Somalia will not recognize somaliland because somaliland was not and is not part of iatlain somalia , its rather its partner in the former somali republic. words and official names of somali regions are very important , most of the faqash and Walaweyns , use somalia , Somali republic interchangeably , which is wrong, its like using Somaliland and Somali Republic referring to Hargaysa and SL government. Somaliland and Somalia have to talk at some point , if that talk fails and continue to fail then the statue quo will remain in effect to eternity, Somaliland will never ever give up its sovereignty for a Hawiye/Daarood duopoly of power. Somaliland for 28 years didn't change nor softened its stand , what makes you think they will change their stand, when they are wining and getting more influence economically and politically.?

Again on your last point , there was no act of union , Somaliland's Parliament passed its own act of union , and the Somalia assembly never voted on an act of union , so both of acts of union are void.

I know you are trying hard to safe guard your Daaroodism by inventing a country that never existed which is Somalia , somalia never existed as a country , it was an Italian colony and on July 1 1960 Somalia became the Somali Republic with Somaliland , at least Somaliland was Somaliland for almost a week. Words do matter , you calling Somaliland somalia is like me calling Italian Somalia , Somaliland. Its tottaly inaccurate. Even using the term Somaliland for Italian Somalia is grounded in ignorance , the British called Italian Somalia ( Italian Somaliland) but the Walaweyn and Faqsh in the south never refereed to them selves as Somaliland but rather somalia. so we should be very careful using the correct names for both territories.

Maybe you misunderstood me, I don't how, I made it clear enough. Somaliland is a territory that is part of Somalia or the Somali Republic (whichever name you like). Thus, Somalia must cede its territory (Somaliland) and grant it Independence. Once this is done the world will recognize Somaliland as an independent state OR Somalia can withhold granting independence (which is the likely possibility) and Somaliland will remain part of Somalia. That is simply what the IC is saying.

Its clear this is beyond your limited comprehension. Ignore qabiil and history for a second and focus on the law that established the Somali Republic.

Once Somaliland and Somalia meet to discuss their differences, It will not be about dissolving the union it would be about whether Somalia is willing to grant Somaliland independence. Why is this you may ask?!

Simple because there was not provisions made in the Act of Union in the event that either party would want the union dissolved. Thus both entities of Somaliland and Italian Somaliland ceased to exist - they are no more!

British Somaliland passed the LAW OF UNION BETWEEN SOMALILAND AND SOMALIA: Law No: 1 of 1960.

Italian Somaliland approved an Act of Union (atto di unione).

They were two different but very similar acts. It was due to ignorance the acts weren't passed correctly.

However, the problem was seen early and the Act of Union 1961 was created. The act applies retrospectively from the day the union was created on 1 july 1960.

Act of Union 1961 - http://www.somalilandlaw.com/Act_of_Uni ... y_1961.pdf

This is the legally binding document. Thus, the state of Somaliland and the State of Somalia do not exist anymore.

So, how can the current Somaliland dissolve the union? Italian Somalialnd doesn't exist legally nor does the State of Somaliland.

Shouldn't it be asking for Independence?

Again like a stupid suborn student you continue to conflate and confuse Somali Republic with Somalia. No Somaliland is not part of somalia or a territory of somalia , both were a territory in a country use to be called the Somali Republic , what part of that you don't comprehend ?

Now can Somalia grants Somaliland independence ? No , they can't , because Somaliland is not part of Somalia , the legal way to do this is to dissolve the union and both parties revert back to their pre-July 1, 1960 status. Its very simple. This is not independence , its a dissolution of a union. Different terms for different reality. Somaliland and Somalia united as one country so the issue is union or dissolution of union, in the case of Puntland is independence since Puntland is part of somalia. Now do you understand the differences between independence and dissolution of union.?

About the act of the union , no act of union for the somali republic was passed, Somaliland had passed one of their own long before independence , but legally the united Parliament ( for both somaliland and somalia) should have passed one , and it never did . The act of union which you refer to , is through a president decree and that even was not brought in front of the national assembly. So for the 10th times there is no Act of Union so drop it.

Now having schooled you in 101 somali republic legal basics , i hope you wont again bring the same useless points. Also, when discussing these legal issue one have to be very careful in using correct terms. there is no nation called Somalia that Somaliland was part of , there was a country called THE SOMALI Republic which both Somaliland and Somalia were part of , and the only legal matter between the two to be discussed is whether to disolve the union or adhere to the union. not INDEPENDENCE a term you constantly use as though Somailand is part of Italian Somalia like jubaland and puntland.

[Sharmarke91]

You are still going in circles just dressing your basic arguments in different colors , but your contention is the same. Now at last you backed off your ridiculous claim of the world demanding Somalia recognize Somaliland and instead you changed the wording into dialogue. Not bad at all , at least we are getting somewhere.

Italian Somalia is never asked to recognize somaliland , not even somaliland asks for such a thing , what somaliland did and demands is a disolution of the failed union. Italian Somalia will not recognize somaliland because somaliland was not and is not part of iatlain somalia , its rather its partner in the former somali republic. words and official names of somali regions are very important , most of the faqash and Walaweyns , use somalia , Somali republic interchangeably , which is wrong, its like using Somaliland and Somali Republic referring to Hargaysa and SL government. Somaliland and Somalia have to talk at some point , if that talk fails and continue to fail then the statue quo will remain in effect to eternity, Somaliland will never ever give up its sovereignty for a Hawiye/Daarood duopoly of power. Somaliland for 28 years didn't change nor softened its stand , what makes you think they will change their stand, when they are wining and getting more influence economically and politically.?

Again on your last point , there was no act of union , Somaliland's Parliament passed its own act of union , and the Somalia assembly never voted on an act of union , so both of acts of union are void.

I know you are trying hard to safe guard your Daaroodism by inventing a country that never existed which is Somalia , somalia never existed as a country , it was an Italian colony and on July 1 1960 Somalia became the Somali Republic with Somaliland , at least Somaliland was Somaliland for almost a week. Words do matter , you calling Somaliland somalia is like me calling Italian Somalia , Somaliland. Its tottaly inaccurate. Even using the term Somaliland for Italian Somalia is grounded in ignorance , the British called Italian Somalia ( Italian Somaliland) but the Walaweyn and Faqsh in the south never refereed to them selves as Somaliland but rather somalia. so we should be very careful using the correct names for both territories.

Maybe you misunderstood me, I don't how, I made it clear enough. Somaliland is a territory that is part of Somalia or the Somali Republic (whichever name you like). Thus, Somalia must cede its territory (Somaliland) and grant it Independence. Once this is done the world will recognize Somaliland as an independent state OR Somalia can withhold granting independence (which is the likely possibility) and Somaliland will remain part of Somalia. That is simply what the IC is saying.

Its clear this is beyond your limited comprehension. Ignore qabiil and history for a second and focus on the law that established the Somali Republic.

Once Somaliland and Somalia meet to discuss their differences, It will not be about dissolving the union it would be about whether Somalia is willing to grant Somaliland independence. Why is this you may ask?!

Simple because there was not provisions made in the Act of Union in the event that either party would want the union dissolved. Thus both entities of Somaliland and Italian Somaliland ceased to exist - they are no more!

British Somaliland passed the LAW OF UNION BETWEEN SOMALILAND AND SOMALIA: Law No: 1 of 1960.

Italian Somaliland approved an Act of Union (atto di unione).

They were two different but very similar acts. It was due to ignorance the acts weren't passed correctly.

However, the problem was seen early and the Act of Union 1961 was created. The act applies retrospectively from the day the union was created on 1 july 1960.

Act of Union 1961 - http://www.somalilandlaw.com/Act_of_Uni ... y_1961.pdf

This is the legally binding document. Thus, the state of Somaliland and the State of Somalia do not exist anymore.

So, how can the current Somaliland dissolve the union? Italian Somalialnd doesn't exist legally nor does the State of Somaliland.

Shouldn't it be asking for Independence?

Again like a stupid suborn student you continue to conflate and confuse Somali Republic with Somalia. No Somaliland is not part of somalia or a territory of somalia , both were a territory in a country use to be called the Somali Republic , what part of that you don't comprehend ?

Now can Somalia grants Somaliland independence ? No , they can't , because Somaliland is not part of Somalia , the legal way to do this is to dissolve the union and both parties revert back to their pre-July 1, 1960 status. Its very simple. This is not independence , its a dissolution of a union. Different terms for different reality. Somaliland and Somalia united as one country so the issue is union or dissolution of union, in the case of Puntland is independence since Puntland is part of somalia. Now do you understand the differences between independence and dissolution of union.?

About the act of the union , no act of union for the somali republic was passed, Somaliland had passed one of their own long before independence , but legally the united Parliament ( for both somaliland and somalia) should have passed one , and it never did . The act of union which you refer to , is through a president decree and that even was not brought in front of the national assembly. So for the 10th times there is no Act of Union so drop it.

Now having schooled you in 101 somali republic legal basics , i hope you wont again bring the same useless points. Also, when discussing these legal issue one have to be very careful in using correct terms. there is no nation called Somalia that Somaliland was part of , there was a country called THE SOMALI Republic which both Somaliland and Somalia were part of , and the only legal matter between the two to be discussed is whether to disolve the union or adhere to the union. not INDEPENDENCE a term you constantly use as though Somailand is part of Italian Somalia like jubaland and puntland.

Sxb your stuck on the same thing.

There was an Act of Union in 1961. That is a matter of fact.

If that Act is legally binding then Somaliland would have to request Independence of Somali Republic/Somalia.

If its no binding and void then Somaliland would call for a dissolution of the union.

I studied law at university particularly international law, I can find out if its binding or not but i haven't the energy nor the time to do the research.

That's all am saying.

[Sharmarke91]

If you read exactly what you posted it belies your own assertion now. The world did not say Somalia has the power to recognize Somaliland or visa versa the world said that both entites should decide their future seprate or together through dialoge, and the rest of the world will abide by whatever result .


No it can't , if Somaliland decide to rejoin the union that official name " somalia" will have to be changed , since Somalia only referes to one part of the union.

.

There was and is no act of union . The answer to that part is very simple.



where did Somaliland ever relinquished its soverignty to modern Somalia??? don't make up words and with it a new history and revisionsim . Somaliland and Somalia joined together forming a united state called the Somali Republic, how can that be called " relinquishing" anything? and if relinquishing is your key word, we can also argue logically that Italian Somalia by joining Somaliland and thus creating the new Somali Republic that they have relinquished their and transefered their soverignty also. Why not apply your twisted logic to Somalia also?? oh i fogot your Daaroodism and hate again is clouding your judgment.

For the current Republic of Somaliland to become independent the Federal Government of Somalia must agree to forsake and renounce its claim to its north western territory because after all sovereignty is vested in it. So, told Somaliland is no different to Puntland or Jubaland.

Again your logic is silly and groundless , Somaliland is not and was not part of this "somalia" , Somaliland and Somalia were equal parteners creating a union so thus Italian Somalia has no claim over somaliland , what italian somalia has claim over is mainting the union whereas Somaliland is opting for disolving the union , there is no territroial claim since Somalia an Italian colony and Somaliland a British colony were not part of one another .

The world is unequivocally declaring that for Somaliland to gain recognition it must first open dialogue with Somalia and Somalia via that dialogue must agree to recognize Somaliland as equal sovereign state. Thus if Somalia refuses to grant this recognition, there is no option for Somaliland to but to remain as part of Somalia. This global decree contradicts what Somalilanders have argued for the last 30 years which was 'recognition will be conferred on as with or without Somalia's approval'. For this its accepted that the world desires for Somaliland follow the same route as South Sudan, Eritrea and Timor-Leste were the parent country granted Independence after many decades of struggling to gain independence.

Somalia would not only be recognizing Somaliland it would also be granting it independence. Which are two different legal principles.

You seem to be stuck on the name 'Somalia' - countries change the names all the time, most recently Swaziland changed its name . When determining the de jure existence of a sovereign independent state you have to look at how it was created in law. As I explained the Somali Republic was created in law (as a legal entity) when the British Somaliland Protectorate and 'Trust Territory of Somaliland under Italian administration' became the State of Somaliland and the State of Somalia respectively and unified to become the Somali Republic by passing the Act of Union. They both relinquished their sovereignty.

The Somali Republic was created as a legal entity for the moment when both parliaments of Somaliland and Somalia passed the Act of Union (although some argue the act wasn't passed correctly, but that's an issue for another discussion).

Here you can find the Act of Union - https://www.hiiraan.com/news4/2013/july ... a_law.aspx

Therefore, both Somaliland an Italian Somaliland ceased to exist in law. They both have no legal claims to gain back sovereignty because the Act of Union didn't stipulate they can gain back sovereignty when ever they wished (if they weren't happy with the union). So, its not Italian Somalia that is denying the modern day Somaliland recognition and Independence its the Somali Republic which happened to change its name to the Federal Republic of Somalia. The legal entity of The Somali Republic going forward from its creation in 1960 was free and entitled to change its name, constitution and territorial bounders if it wished.

So, Somaliland today is a de facto state (existing in reality) but not in law - Legally its part of the Somalia. And since its legally part of Somalia international law allows Somalia to either renounce its claims to the Somaliland territory or keep it as part of this territorial sovereignty.

This is nothing to do with Darod its simple international law.

You are still going in circles just dressing your basic arguments in different colors , but your contention is the same. Now at last you backed off your ridiculous claim of the world demanding Somalia recognize Somaliland and instead you changed the wording into dialogue. Not bad at all , at least we are getting somewhere.

Italian Somalia is never asked to recognize somaliland , not even somaliland asks for such a thing , what somaliland did and demands is a disolution of the failed union. Italian Somalia will not recognize somaliland because somaliland was not and is not part of iatlain somalia , its rather its partner in the former somali republic. words and official names of somali regions are very important , most of the faqash and Walaweyns , use somalia , Somali republic interchangeably , which is wrong, its like using Somaliland and Somali Republic referring to Hargaysa and SL government. Somaliland and Somalia have to talk at some point , if that talk fails and continue to fail then the statue quo will remain in effect to eternity, Somaliland will never ever give up its sovereignty for a Hawiye/Daarood duopoly of power. Somaliland for 28 years didn't change nor softened its stand , what makes you think they will change their stand, when they are wining and getting more influence economically and politically.?

Again on your last point , there was no act of union , Somaliland's Parliament passed its own act of union , and the Somalia assembly never voted on an act of union , so both of acts of union are void.

I know you are trying hard to safe guard your Daaroodism by inventing a country that never existed which is Somalia , somalia never existed as a country , it was an Italian colony and on July 1 1960 Somalia became the Somali Republic with Somaliland , at least Somaliland was Somaliland for almost a week. Words do matter , you calling Somaliland somalia is like me calling Italian Somalia , Somaliland. Its tottaly inaccurate. Even using the term Somaliland for Italian Somalia is grounded in ignorance , the British called Italian Somalia ( Italian Somaliland) but the Walaweyn and Faqsh in the south never refereed to them selves as Somaliland but rather somalia. so we should be very careful using the correct names for both territories.

In terms of foreign relations Somaliland at its worst currently compared to how it was under Riyale. Every Somaliland politician whether mucaarid or muxaafid is saying this.

Interanlly, it also at its worst with the Jegaan and Garxajis division that wasn't there before and Somaliland being on the verge of war with Puntland.

Economically, Somaliland is no different to any part of Somalia whether Puntland or South-central. Apart from the DP World deal which hasn't materialized yet i can't say see any particular successes economically.

[X.Playa]

Maybe you misunderstood me, I don't how, I made it clear enough. Somaliland is a territory that is part of Somalia or the Somali Republic (whichever name you like). Thus, Somalia must cede its territory (Somaliland) and grant it Independence. Once this is done the world will recognize Somaliland as an independent state OR Somalia can withhold granting independence (which is the likely possibility) and Somaliland will remain part of Somalia. That is simply what the IC is saying.

Its clear this is beyond your limited comprehension. Ignore qabiil and history for a second and focus on the law that established the Somali Republic.

Once Somaliland and Somalia meet to discuss their differences, It will not be about dissolving the union it would be about whether Somalia is willing to grant Somaliland independence. Why is this you may ask?!

Simple because there was not provisions made in the Act of Union in the event that either party would want the union dissolved. Thus both entities of Somaliland and Italian Somaliland ceased to exist - they are no more!

British Somaliland passed the LAW OF UNION BETWEEN SOMALILAND AND SOMALIA: Law No: 1 of 1960.

Italian Somaliland approved an Act of Union (atto di unione).

They were two different but very similar acts. It was due to ignorance the acts weren't passed correctly.

However, the problem was seen early and the Act of Union 1961 was created. The act applies retrospectively from the day the union was created on 1 july 1960.

Act of Union 1961 - http://www.somalilandlaw.com/Act_of_Uni ... y_1961.pdf

This is the legally binding document. Thus, the state of Somaliland and the State of Somalia do not exist anymore.

So, how can the current Somaliland dissolve the union? Italian Somalialnd doesn't exist legally nor does the State of Somaliland.

Shouldn't it be asking for Independence?

Again like a stupid suborn student you continue to conflate and confuse Somali Republic with Somalia. No Somaliland is not part of somalia or a territory of somalia , both were a territory in a country use to be called the Somali Republic , what part of that you don't comprehend ?

Now can Somalia grants Somaliland independence ? No , they can't , because Somaliland is not part of Somalia , the legal way to do this is to dissolve the union and both parties revert back to their pre-July 1, 1960 status. Its very simple. This is not independence , its a dissolution of a union. Different terms for different reality. Somaliland and Somalia united as one country so the issue is union or dissolution of union, in the case of Puntland is independence since Puntland is part of somalia. Now do you understand the differences between independence and dissolution of union.?

About the act of the union , no act of union for the somali republic was passed, Somaliland had passed one of their own long before independence , but legally the united Parliament ( for both somaliland and somalia) should have passed one , and it never did . The act of union which you refer to , is through a president decree and that even was not brought in front of the national assembly. So for the 10th times there is no Act of Union so drop it.

Now having schooled you in 101 somali republic legal basics , i hope you wont again bring the same useless points. Also, when discussing these legal issue one have to be very careful in using correct terms. there is no nation called Somalia that Somaliland was part of , there was a country called THE SOMALI Republic which both Somaliland and Somalia were part of , and the only legal matter between the two to be discussed is whether to disolve the union or adhere to the union. not INDEPENDENCE a term you constantly use as though Somailand is part of Italian Somalia like jubaland and puntland.

Sxb your stuck on the same thing.

There was an Act of Union in 1961. That is a matter of fact.

If that Act is legally binding then Somaliland would have to request Independence of Somali Republic/Somalia.

If its no binding and void then Somaliland would call for a dissolution of the union.

I studied law at university particularly international law, I can find out if its binding or not but i haven't the energy nor the time to do the research.

That's all am saying.

You are a desperado a typical Daarood clouded with hate , even though your whole argument is debunked faithfully and blindly you continue to spew the same defunct points.

There was never an act of union , its not me who says that , its the very UN itself , Paolo Contini the head of the UN Consultative Commission For Integration from 1960-1965 he worked with the Somali republic government trying to integrate Somaliland's laws and Somalia's laws . He authored an entire book on the experience and how the two territories never jointly passed an Act Of Union. You can read the book and educate yourself a bit, instead of regurgitating the same old Daaroodism blind crap, that can easily be demolished with a google search.

[Sharmarke91]

Again like a stupid suborn student you continue to conflate and confuse Somali Republic with Somalia. No Somaliland is not part of somalia or a territory of somalia , both were a territory in a country use to be called the Somali Republic , what part of that you don't comprehend ?

Now can Somalia grants Somaliland independence ? No , they can't , because Somaliland is not part of Somalia , the legal way to do this is to dissolve the union and both parties revert back to their pre-July 1, 1960 status. Its very simple. This is not independence , its a dissolution of a union. Different terms for different reality. Somaliland and Somalia united as one country so the issue is union or dissolution of union, in the case of Puntland is independence since Puntland is part of somalia. Now do you understand the differences between independence and dissolution of union.?

About the act of the union , no act of union for the somali republic was passed, Somaliland had passed one of their own long before independence , but legally the united Parliament ( for both somaliland and somalia) should have passed one , and it never did . The act of union which you refer to , is through a president decree and that even was not brought in front of the national assembly. So for the 10th times there is no Act of Union so drop it.

Now having schooled you in 101 somali republic legal basics , i hope you wont again bring the same useless points. Also, when discussing these legal issue one have to be very careful in using correct terms. there is no nation called Somalia that Somaliland was part of , there was a country called THE SOMALI Republic which both Somaliland and Somalia were part of , and the only legal matter between the two to be discussed is whether to disolve the union or adhere to the union. not INDEPENDENCE a term you constantly use as though Somailand is part of Italian Somalia like jubaland and puntland.

Sxb your stuck on the same thing.

There was an Act of Union in 1961. That is a matter of fact.

If that Act is legally binding then Somaliland would have to request Independence of Somali Republic/Somalia.

If its no binding and void then Somaliland would call for a dissolution of the union.

I studied law at university particularly international law, I can find out if its binding or not but i haven't the energy nor the time to do the research.

That's all am saying.

You are a desperado a typical Daarood clouded with hate , even though your whole argument is debunked faithfully and blindly you continue to spew the same defunct points.

There was never an act of union , its not me who says that , its the very UN itself , Paolo Contini the head of the UN Consultative Commission For Integration from 1960-1965 he worked with the Somali republic government trying to integrate Somaliland's laws and Somalia's laws . He authored an entire book on the experience and how the two territories never jointly passed an Act Of Union. You can read the book and educate yourself a bit, instead of regurgitating the same old Daaroodism blind crap, that can easily be demolished with a google search.

Darod's don't hate Isaaq. Isaaq hate Darod.

I don't know what your reason for denying the existence of the Act of Union is to be honest, even The Somaliland Foreign Ministry acknowledges its existence but questions its validity.

What's the book called? I wanna read it.

[X.Playa]

Isaaq don't even pay much attention to Daarood , i wish they did , but most Isaaq are obsessed with internal squabble then to face the Daarood perpetual hate mongering.

Hers the book if it makes any difference .The Somali Republic: An Experiment in Legal Integration (Cass Library of African Law) 1st Edition

[Kismaayo21]

Daroods don't even pay much attention to Eeydhowrr , i wish they did , but most Daroods are obsessed with internal squabble then to face the Eeydhowrr perpetual hate mongering.

Hers the book if it makes any difference .The Somali Republic: An Experiment in Legal Integration (Cass Library of African Law) 1st Edition

FIXED

The Infidel Eeyydhowrr is out right smoking crack.

[theyuusuf143]

We are legally and militarily on the right path. We get what we want by force . No one can challenge us.

[X.Playa]

Daroods don't even pay much attention to Eeydhowrr , i wish they did , but most Daroods are obsessed with internal squabble then to face the Eeydhowrr perpetual hate mongering.

Hers the book if it makes any difference .The Somali Republic: An Experiment in Legal Integration (Cass Library of African Law) 1st Edition

FIXED

The Infidel Eeyydhowrr is out right smoking crack.

You sound like your big booty cagdheer bimbo Araweelo who use to be in this forum few years ago. using clapping icons all the time. Next use the eye-roll icon too.