Editorial: When economic giants become too powerful to challenge

There is no denying the enormous contribution that Dahabshiil and Hormuud have made to the economies of Somalia and Somaliland. For decades, these companies have stepped into gaps left by weak state institutions, providing financial services, telecommunications, mobile money, and employment where few alternatives existed. Millions of families depend on them every day, and without their infrastructure, much of the region's economy would struggle to function.

Dahabshiil has become the backbone of the Horn of Africa's remittance system. With the Somali diaspora sending an estimated $1.6 billion home annually — more than one-fifth of Somalia's GDP — the company reportedly handles between 40 and 50 percent of those transfers. In a country where formal banking remains limited, Dahabshiil has provided secure, rapid financial services that sustain households, finance small businesses, and support humanitarian relief. It has also contributed to infrastructure projects and other charitable initiatives.

Hormuud has transformed the telecommunications sector in a similar way. Its EVC Plus mobile money platform has become the primary method of payment for millions of people, creating one of Africa's most cashless economies. The company also describes itself as the country's largest private-sector employer, with tens of thousands of jobs linked directly or indirectly to its operations.

These achievements deserve recognition. However, economic success should never place any company beyond scrutiny.

The question is no longer whether these companies are important. They clearly are. The real question is whether their extraordinary dominance is beginning to limit the very economic growth they once helped create.

When a handful of corporations dominate telecommunications, finance, mobile money, and significant portions of retail commerce, opportunities for entrepreneurs inevitably become more limited. New competitors face high barriers to entry, innovation may slow, and consumers are left with fewer choices. While Dahabshiil and Hormuud have created thousands of jobs, critics argue that a more competitive marketplace could generate many more opportunities across the wider private sector.

Recent events have only intensified these concerns. In August 2025, Telesom and Somtel faced widespread public criticism after attempting to significantly increase mobile data prices in Somaliland. The proposal prompted accusations of coordinated pricing and renewed debate over whether effective competition exists in the telecommunications market.

Questions have also been raised about the relationship between economic power and political influence. Critics have alleged that Dahabshiil's financial strength has translated into considerable influence within Somaliland's political institutions. Allegations have included campaign financing, close relationships with successive administrations, the appointment of individuals with close family connections to influential public offices, and the transfer of valuable public assets to companies associated with the group. These allegations have been widely debated in public discourse, although they remain contested and have not all been established by judicial findings.

Another concern is transparency. Because Dahabshiil and its telecommunications affiliate Somtel operate as private companies, they are generally not required to publish detailed audited financial statements or publicly disclose their tax contributions. In economies where regulatory institutions remain relatively weak, greater transparency from dominant corporations could strengthen public confidence and demonstrate accountability.

None of this diminishes the remarkable role these companies have played in rebuilding commerce after decades of conflict. Their investments, innovation, and resilience have helped keep economies functioning during extraordinarily difficult periods.

Yet history offers an important lesson: economies thrive not because a few companies become exceptionally powerful, but because many businesses have the opportunity to compete fairly. Strong competition encourages innovation, creates more jobs, lowers prices, and reduces the risks associated with excessive concentration of economic power.

The issue, therefore, is not whether Dahabshiil and Hormuud should succeed. They already have. The challenge is ensuring that their success does not unintentionally prevent others from succeeding as well.

Healthy economies require strong businesses. They also require strong institutions, effective competition laws, transparent governance, and independent regulators capable of ensuring that no company — regardless of its size or influence — holds disproportionate power over markets or public policy.

Dahabshiil and Hormuud remain indispensable pillars of the Somali economy. But their continued success should be matched by greater accountability, stronger competition, and a regulatory environment that allows the next generation of entrepreneurs to grow alongside them — not in their shadow.