What impact did the prosecutions have on the Somali community and local trust in policing?
Executive summary
Prosecutions and accountability efforts in Somalia have been paired with large UN and donor-led programmes to professionalize police and rebuild public trust; UNDP’s Joint Police Programme Phase II explicitly aims to “enhance the professionalism and capacity of Somalia’s police forces to build trust from the community” and to strengthen community engagement in newly recovered areas [1] [2]. Independent civil-society efforts and police advisory committees report persistent mistrust born of decades of conflict, meaning prosecutions alone cannot immediately repair community–police relations [3] [4].
1. Prosecutions as one tool amid wider reform campaigns
International and UN-backed initiatives frame prosecutions and accountability as part of a broader strategy: the Joint Police Programme Phase II couples capacity-building, community policing and oversight mechanisms with efforts to professionalize the Somali Police Force — signalling that prosecutions are being pursued alongside training, institutional reform and community engagement rather than as an isolated fix [1] [2] [5].
2. Trust is built more by community policing than headline trials
Programme documents and UN statements emphasise community-oriented approaches — deeper engagement with elders, women and youth and the creation of a “stronger social contract” — suggesting that everyday interactions and service delivery matter more to local perceptions than discrete prosecutions [4] [2]. Saferworld reporting from Mogadishu, Kismayo and Baidoa finds that people often feel “uncomfortable speaking to the police,” and projects focused on police advisory committees aim to rebuild trust through joint local action, not only through punitive measures [3].
3. Prosecutions can increase legitimacy if seen as fair and local
When accountability processes are transparent, locally owned and accompanied by institutional change, they can strengthen legitimacy. UNDP and UNSOM materials underline the importance of oversight and rights-based policing as prerequisites for trust-building; by embedding prosecutions within wider reforms (training, oversight, gender-responsive services), donors hope to demonstrate impartiality and rule-of-law gains that communities can recognise [1] [5] [2].
4. Mistrust is deep-rooted; prosecutions risk backfiring if perceived as external or selective
Saferworld’s field reporting documents long-standing reluctance to engage formal institutions because of decades of conflict and parallel informal security arrangements [3]. Available sources do not detail specific prosecutions that backfired, but programme literature warns implicitly that enforcement actions must not be seen as externally imposed or single-issue interventions — otherwise they risk reinforcing suspicions and pushing people back toward informal security providers [4] [3].
5. Local participation and ownership are the decisive variables
UNDP materials and Saferworld both emphasise participation — police advisory committees, community forums and locally led processes — as central to restoring trust. These sources make clear that where communities lead the agenda and police are trained to respond to everyday grievances, the social contract can be repaired more sustainably than through prosecutions alone [1] [4] [3].
6. Donor coordination and sustainability shape impact
Joint programmes — funded and coordinated by the EU, UNDP, UN Women and partners — aim to centralise donor support to ensure reforms are coherent and long-term [6] [2] [5]. The effectiveness of prosecutions in rebuilding trust will depend on whether this funding translates into enduring oversight bodies, community policing posts and courts capable of fair, timely adjudication [6] [2].
7. Counterpoint: US Somali diaspora experience shows different dynamics
Reporting on Minneapolis demonstrates another side of the policing–community trust equation: proactive local policing outreach and policies limiting cooperation with federal immigration enforcement can make diaspora Somalis feel protected and supported, showing that police stances and visible local leadership matter to perceived safety [7] [8]. This suggests that in diverse contexts, local policy choices and community engagement can either amplify or mitigate the political consequences of enforcement actions [7] [8].
8. Bottom line: prosecutions necessary but insufficient
The reviewed sources frame prosecutions as a necessary element of accountability, but they make clear that prosecutions alone will not rebuild trust. Durable gains require parallel investments in community policing, oversight, gender-responsive services and locally led mechanisms — the precise pillars promoted by UNDP and civil-society actors working in Somalia [1] [4] [3] [2].
Limitations: available sources provide programme goals, donor statements and civil-society reporting but do not supply detailed case studies of specific prosecutions or systematic public-opinion polling measuring trust shifts directly tied to prosecutions; therefore causal claims about prosecutions’ precise effects are not found in current reporting [1] [4] [3] [2].