MOGADISHU (SD) — Members of the Somali Future Council have accused President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud of interfering in the Supreme Court and trying to remove its chairman, Bashe Yusuf Ahmed.

Speaking at a press conference in Mogadishu, the council’s Secretary, Mohamed Aden Jimale (Kofi), said the council strongly opposed the president’s actions against the Supreme Court chairman and its judges. He accused the president of taking control of the court even though, according to the opposition, his time in office has ended.

Kofi said the council supports the Supreme Court’s decision that the terms of the president, parliament and government have ended. He said Somalia should hold elections within 90 days and that all political parties should agree on how the elections will be held.

The council said the court’s decision could help end the political crisis. It also warned that the growing dispute between the president and opposition groups could create further problems for the country. Kofi said President Hassan Sheikh would be responsible if the situation became worse.

The statement comes as Somalia faces disagreements over the president’s term, the leadership of the Supreme Court and the next elections. President Hassan Sheikh has invited the Peace and Life Party, the Somali Future Council, the National Unity Forum and the Civil Society Umbrella to attend a national meeting in Mogadishu from November 14 to 18, 2026.

The Future Council’s statement shows that the opposition sees the dispute over the Supreme Court as part of a wider constitutional crisis. It argues that the president must respect the court’s decision and that political power should be exercised according to the law.

The key challenge is whether the government and opposition can reach an agreement on the election process before the dispute causes further instability. The November meeting will provide an opportunity to address these disagreements, but its success will depend on whether both sides are willing to negotiate and accept a common way forward.

The legal meaning of the November 5 court ruling remains disputed, making the full decision and the government’s response important to resolving the disagreement.