Cirro Says He Wants Recognition Based On 'Valid Legal Arguments'

Which Mogadishu (central government) did. No problems.
Questionable:

1734026869393.png


1734026824647.png


Go train as a lawyer and write a journal paper then I might accept your argument, until then we listen to the laywers.
 
Questionable:

View attachment 349653

View attachment 349652

Go train as a lawyer and write a journal paper then I might accept your argument, until then we listen to the laywers.
He said it was questionable, not that it was factually void. Sorry but that isn't cutting it. At best he is arguing semantics but the real way we know its legit is the fact that there was next to no disagreements or resistence by former Somalilanders or anyone else after the union was ratified. Or that Somaliland politicians (to my knowledge) have never brought up the idea of the union being void. Probably because the union was in fact legit.
 
He said it was questionable, not that it was factually void. Sorry but that isn't cutting it. At best he is arguing semantics but the real way we know its legit is the fact that there was next to no disagreements or resistence by former Somalilanders or anyone else after the union was ratified. Or that Somaliland politicians (to my knowledge) have never brought up the idea of the union being void. Probably because the union was in fact legit.

I don't think it's a paper on semantics, it's a legal paper from the international and comparative law quaterly.

There was no resistance because it was a gentelmens agreement that was evolving over time until it was revoked. Now you are trying to argue it's legally solid when there is clearly problems there.
 
Can anyone explain how this fake news of trump recognizing sland spread? What type of lobbyiest are these, you got the ethiopians, the oromo, the israelis, the emiratis What the hell is going on
 
I don't think it's a paper on semantics, it's a legal paper from the international and comparative law quaterly.

There was no resistance because it was a gentelmens agreement that was evolving over time until it was revoked. Now you are trying to argue it's legally solid when there is clearly problems there.
Working fulltime acting like a somali, you are a clear ethiopian being funded to push this somaliland idea to split somalis further.
 

Thegoodshepherd

Galkacyo iyo Calula dhexdood
VIP
Questionable:

View attachment 349653

View attachment 349652

Go train as a lawyer and write a journal paper then I might accept your argument, until then we listen to the laywers.

The Somali Republic's parliament, which by passed the Act of Union on Jan 18 1961, was composed of the 33 British Somaliland MPs and the 90 Italian Somaliland MPs. They together passed by acclamation the Act of Union which the president they had elected on July 1st 1960 signed into law. The union is ironclad.

This is what Cotran says later in the same paper:
somalia somaliland.png



ps. none of this matters as Somalis is a sovereign state that has domestic jurisdiction when interpreting its own legal matters. Only the Somali state can interpret its own constitutive laws.

Technicalities do not impact matters of existential importance. Congress forgot to admit Ohio to the United States and this remained the case for 150 years. No one cares about technicalities in constitutional matters.
https://nowiknow.com/ohios-admission-problem/
 

Trending

Top