Abstract

Corruption is a significant issue in Somalia, affecting daily lives and hindering development. It is primarily caused by weak governance, poverty, and economic hardship, and therefore its recently a subject of major political, policy and academic debates and media. This study investigates the effectiveness of Somali courts in handling anti-corruption cases. It analyzes public perceptions of court efficiency, judicial independence, and fairness in these cases. The research employed primary datacolleced from 217 individuals, using quesationnairs as data collection tool.  The study reveals that 68% of respondents find court procedures inefficient, while 38% doubt the investigative process. Additionally, 61% express a lack of faith in the judicial system's effectiveness. A significant majority (64%) agreed with widespread public frustration regarding the slow pace of justice. Further, the majority of respondents (60%) believe the judiciary is not independent from political influence, with 49% not confident in its integrity, transparency, and accountability, while most respondents believe court decisions in anti-corruption cases are unfair, and the judiciary is not effectively deterring corruption, with 71% of respondents expressing concern. However, the judiciary can play a crucial role in combating corruption, but, in Somalia, it faces obstacles such as political interference, limited resources, and lack of independence. Therefore, enhancing judicial effectiveness requires addressing these challenges and promoting transparency, accountability, and public participation. The study highlights a gap between public expectations and the justice system's performance, highlighting the need for comprehensive reforms to enhance efficiency, transparency, and public confidence. Recommendations include strengthening judicial selection, ensuring adequate remuneration, promoting judicial education, streamlining procedures, and investing in technology.