SomaliNet Forums

VeiledGarbasar wrote:Heeeey, my father didn't do anything wrong, he just got them positions, and helped them out with whatever why he can. He never ever got them houses and stuff like that. He just helped them, I'm saying qabils helping each other is fine. I realise there was other form of corruption during the Siyaad barre government, but you have to understand it might not be something he was OKAY with, by then he got old and people were taking advantage.

All Somali governments weren't free from corruption, no GOVERNMENT is, the UK one xata waa corrupt.

I was saying LAND was take from my father by the previous government and nationalised I believe.

ps. My father helped many people, regardless of qabiil. On guy claimed he was a relative of my father when he went Bosaso and this businessman there, said I know him and because of that helped him out.

This is my point which voltage cant seem to agree with 20 years of being in government meant that mareexan got the most benefit. If you father as a businessman can you imagine what does in government did?

MY Bad,You Mixing Public Buidling and Private Properties.All I said was,Public Buildings Like Universities,Gov Offices should not be returned and if someone claims that the land it was built on is mine and the Gov took it by force with out reparations and shows all the necessary doc,that person is eligible for monetary compensations and the building will remain public.However,as the case with your father is complex,because it involves ownership of private property and the only way to solve it is through legal court system.

Addoow wrote:MY Bad,You Mixing Public Buidling and Private Properties.All I said was,Public Buildings Like Universities,Gov Offices should not be returned and if someone claims that the land it was built on is mine and the Gov took it by force with out reparations and shows all the necessary doc,that person is eligible for monetary compensations and the building will remain public.However,as the case with your father is complex,because it involves ownership of private property and the only way to solve it is through legal court system.

I see. Thanks.

Alpha its like this, you father owns some land, the government says its nationalising and some how that lands ends up belonging to me else fast forward 20 years and the civil war happens, I leave the country and squatters move into the house fast forward another 20 years I come back to claim my land back, 1 do I have the right to call the squatters tuugo and 2 does that house belong to me or your father who says the land was taken off him but I also say its my land because I have documents. This what all this about.

greenday wrote:Alpha its like this, you father owns some land, the government says its nationalising and some how that lands ends up belonging to me else fast forward 20 years and the civil war happens, I leave the country and squatters move into the house fast forward another 20 years I come back to claim my land back, 1 do I have the right to call the squatters tuugo and 2 does that house belong to me or your father who says the land was taken off him but I also say its my land because I have documents. This what all this about.

I realize what this is all about.

IF my father (in your scenario) was compensated monetarily during the nationalization process, and he accepted it, then I nor he has any claim to that land. Thus, the property is yours. However, if nationalization occurred by force and my father's property (again, following your scenario) was taken by the government, without any compensation, then you nor the squatters have any rights over the land. This is my opinion.


Can anyone point me out to where I can better understand the method of nationalization under the MSB or any other Somali government?

Alpha, what money? when something became nationalised you were expected to accept, many might have just said yea fine because it was for nation and even then should what belong to the nation or should have been given to individuals?

Say someone gave the land for free to the nation and they find out it was given to someone, then dont they have the right to claim back their land? Or at least it should be returned to the state because the person gave it to the state to be a shared.

My father wasn't into Land taking, asag ba land laga qaday.

Anyway, Green I would help you because it is my business and my money, ofcourse it can get tricky. Just now these students who were going to turkey, some high officials are able to get letters for their qarabo kids, because they know the turkish lot, and they have power. However, the kid would have to pass an exam, so the merit from the on is the kids.....but since I got your daughter the access to the exam is that corruption? Something like that happens in this world, ALOT.

Alphanumeric wrote: IF my father (in your scenario) was compensated monetarily during the nationalization process, and he accepted it, then I nor he has any claim to that land. Thus, the property is yours. However, if nationalization occurred by force and my father's property (again, following your scenario) was taken by the government, without any compensation, then you nor the squatters have any rights over the land. This is my opinion.


Can anyone point me out to where I can better understand the method of nationalization under the MSB or any other Somali government?

This is what happened to my father, but you can't do anything about it dear. You have to accept. Prime land was taken from him and nationalized or some ish like that, he was compensated, but he didn't ask for it did he? Why was the land he had nationalized. Bad move from the government, because now he was a foe not a friend.

Warsan at least you dad got some money, being a big shot must have helped, most people got nothing or verrrry little for farms I dont know why farms had become nationalised

Doesn't anyone stop to remember that the MSB government was a national government and consisted of different people from all sorts of backgrounds? What about all the Hawiye former government members who were given lands that were nationalized, taken from others; Hawiye or not? How come everyone simply chooses to disregard them? Furthermore, what about the countless Hawiye people who's homes were looted during the civil war? By other Hawiyes? Mostly marauders from Mudug or the central regions who've never seen Xamar or its surroundings? Nothing is ever black & white. Instead of trying to legitimize the post-civil war looting to the going-ons during the 20 years of Kacaanka, why not employ some common sense & try not to stir clan hostilities? Its foolish to try to pin all blame on a single clan, when it was a few greedy individuals that perpetuated the violence and profiteered from it. Most of you are too young to even remember a Somalia before all this clan carnage or even the war, no clue where all of it comes from?

Why was land that was taken by the government by whatever means with the promise of "nationalisation" then be "given" or "sold" to private owners? If policies changed, shouldn't it have been given back to the people it was taken from?

Avicenna wrote:Doesn't anyone stop to remember that the MSB government was a national government and consisted of different people from all sorts of backgrounds? What about all the Hawiye former government members who were given lands that were nationalized, taken from others; Hawiye or not? How come everyone simply chooses to disregard them? Furthermore, what about the countless Hawiye people who's homes were looted during the civil war? By other Hawiyes? Mostly marauders from Mudug or the central regions who've never seen Xamar or its surroundings? Nothing is ever black & white. Instead of trying to legitimize the post-civil war looting to the going-ons during the 20 years of Kacaanka, why not employ some common sense & try not to stir clan hostilities? Its foolish to try to pin all blame on a single clan, when it was a few greedy individuals that perpetuated the violence and profiteered from it. Most of you are too young to even remember a Somalia before all this clan carnage or even the war, no clue where all of it comes from?

No one has pinned anything on anyone. Thieves are thieves, I said this very early on in this thread. This is not about qabiil, it's about rightful owners getting back their properties and how this difficult process should be managed.

greenday wrote:Warsan at least you dad got some money, being a big shot must have helped, most people got nothing or verrrry little for farms I dont know why farms had become nationalised

Yeah he left it at that, and was even working with the government.

Avicenna wrote: How come everyone simply chooses to disregard them? Furthermore, what about the countless Hawiye people who's homes were looted during the civil war? By other Hawiyes? ?

That happened to my father again. Sh!t is crazy. We left it too, we got all our properties and stuff just recently. (I believe during Islamic Union Court.)

This thread was to show that tuuganimo was not something in which started after 91

Warsan my ayeeyos house in tofiiq sidi loga qaxay sanad kahora la dhisay again Marka when someone tell me nayaa you were living in ma house am like keygi aba dan uwaye kaga intee geyna?

Veiled,

I'm not claiming land or property. In my post, the roles were reversed, as according with greenday's scenario.

greenday wrote:Alpha, what money? when something became nationalised you were expected to accept, many might have just said yea fine because it was for nation and even then should what belong to the nation or should have been given to individuals?

Say someone gave the land for free to the nation and they find out it was given to someone, then dont they have the right to claim back their land? Or at least it should be returned to the state because the person gave it to the state to be a shared.

I really don't have a proper understanding of the method of nationalization. Personally speaking, I'm against forced nationalization. If the land my father currently "owns" is being disputed by those who owned it prior to nationalization, and they were given no compensation for it, then there is a problem. If I were to inherit the property, and if the squatters were to be removed/left willingly, and if there was a dispute of land being taken forcibly under the government, I would give up the property. But that's a lot of ifs.

But, how can the disputer prove without a doubt that the property was his, even before nationalization? And how far back should we go, to prove the land was his ancestrally speaking?

Happy Desperado wrote:Why was land that was taken by the government by whatever means with the promise of "nationalisation" then be "given" or "sold" to private owners? If policies changed, shouldn't it have been given back to the people it was taken from?

Of course it should be given back to its rightful owners. But should it be the fighting words people should use whenever giving back post-civil war properties is mentioned? No.

Only simpletons yearning for belonging dwell & obsess over clans. It's one of Adler's personality disorder theories. The world is so much more evolved than our primitive & petty squabbles.

All in due time, inshallah!