|
Somalia Courts
The constitution of 1961 had provided for a unified judiciary
independent of the executive and the legislature. A 1962 law
integrated the courts of northern and southern Somalia into a
four-tiered system: the Supreme Court, courts of appeal, regional
courts, and district courts. Sharia courts were discontinued
although judges were expected to take the sharia into
consideration when making decisions. The Siad Barre government
did not fundamentally alter this structure; nor had the
provisional government made any significant changes as of May
1992.
At the lowest level of the Somali judicial system were the
eighty-four district courts, each of which consisted of civil and
criminal divisions. The civil division of the district court had
jurisdiction over matters requiring the application of the
sharia, or customary law, and suits involving claims of up to
3,000 Somali shillings (for value of the
shilling, see Glossary).
The criminal division of the district court had jurisdiction over
offenses punishable by fines or prison sentences of less than
three years.
There were eight regional courts, each consisting of three
divisions. The ordinary division had jurisdiction over penal and
civil cases considered too serious to be heard by the district
courts. The assize division considered only major criminal cases,
that is, those concerning crimes punishable by more than ten
years' imprisonment. A third division handled cases pertaining to
labor legislation. In both the district and regional courts, a
single magistrate, assisted by two laymen, heard cases, decided
questions of fact, and voted on the guilt or innocence of the
accused.
Somalia's next-highest tier of courts consisted of the two
courts of appeal. The court of appeals for the southern region
sat at Mogadishu, and the northern region's court of appeals sat
at Hargeysa. Each court of appeal had two divisions. The ordinary
division heard appeals of district court decisions and of
decisions of the ordinary division of the regional courts,
whereas the assize division was only for appeals from the
regional assize courts. A single judge presided over cases in
both divisions. Two laymen assisted the judge in the ordinary
division, and four laymen assisted the judge in the assize
division. The senior judges of the courts of appeal, who were
called presidents, administered all the courts in their
respective regions.
The Supreme Court, which sat at Mogadishu, had ultimate
authority for the uniform interpretation of the law. It heard
appeals of decisions and judgments of the lower courts and of
actions taken by public attorneys, and settled questions of court
jurisdiction. The Supreme Court was composed of a chief justice,
who was referred to as the president, a vice president, nine
surrogate justices, and four laymen. The president, two other
judges, and four laymen constituted a full panel for plenary
sessions of the Supreme Court. In ordinary sessions, one judge
presided with the assistance of two other judges and two laymen.
The president of the Supreme Court decided whether a case was to
be handled in plenary or ordinary session, on the basis of the
importance of the matter being considered.
Although the military government did not change the basic
structure of the court system, it did introduce a major new
institution, the National Security Courts (NSCs), which operated
outside the ordinary legal system and under the direct control of
the executive. These courts, which sat at Mogadishu and the
regional capitals, had jurisdiction over serious offenses defined
by the government as affecting the security of the state,
including offenses against public order and crimes by government
officials. The NSC heard a broad range of cases, passing
sentences for embezzlement by public officials, murder, political
activities against the state, and thefts of government food
stocks. A senior military officer was president of each NSC. He
was assisted by two other judges, usually also military officers.
A special military attorney general prosecuted cases brought
before the NSC. No other court, not even the Supreme Court, could
review NSC sentences. Appeals of NSC verdicts could be taken only
to the president of the republic. Opponents of the Siad Barre
regime accused the NSC of sentencing hundreds of people to death
for political reasons. In October 1990, Siad Barre announced the
abolition of the widely feared and detested courts; as of May
1992, the NSCs had not been reinstituted by the provisional
government.
Before the 1969 coup, the Higher Judicial Council had responsibility for the
selection, promotion, and discipline of members of the judiciary. The council
was chaired by the president of the Supreme Court and included justices of the
court, the attorney general, and three members elected by the National Assembly.
In 1970 military officers assumed all positions on the Higher Judicial Council.
The effect of this change was to make the judiciary accountable to the executive.
One of the announced aims of the provisional government after the defeat of
Siad Barre was the restoration of judicial independence.
|
