UPSC/APPSC Mains June 12, 2019 - Parliament and Presidential Systems of Government

Описание: Q. Why India Adopted Parliamentary form of Government rather than Presidential Systems of Government. Discuss (150 words, 10 Marks.)

The two most popular forms of government are Parliamentary and Presidential. India has adopted for the Parliamentary form of government. In this chapter, we shall see the features of both the systems.
PARLIAMENTARY GOVERNMENT
As the name suggests, in the Parliamentary form of government, the Parliament is supreme and the Executive, comprises of some members of the Parliament, is directly accountable to it. The examples of this system involves voters selecting parliamentary representatives. The party that wins the largest number of congressional seats then selects the head of government who is varyingly known as the Prime Minister, Chancellor, or Premier. In a government organized in accordance with the Parliamentary system, this person or a group of persons are law makers and executors at the same time. They are leaders of Parliament and at the same time heads of ministries. Hence, it has been said that under the Parliamentary system there is no principle of the separation of powers as a principle of law.
The difference between Parliamentary and Presidential forms of government is better understood through the nature of Legislature - Executive relationship. The form of government in which the Executive is selected from amongst the members of the Legislature and is responsible to the Legislature is called Parliamentary government. In Parliamentary system, thus, the Legislature and Executive are integrated into each other.
In Presidential system, the President is directly elected by the people and he selected his Executive at his discretion. The Executive is not selected from the Legislature. This type of government is organized on the principle of separation of powers. In other words, the Parliamentary government is ‘responsible’, while the Presidential system, though ultimately answerable to the people, is not responsible to the Legislature.
FEATURES OF PARLIAMENTARY FORM OF GOVERNMENT

1. Close relationship between the Legislature and the Executive

2. Responsibility of the Executive to the Legislature

3. Dual Executive

4. Leadership of the Prime Minister

5. Individual Responsibility

6. Political homogeneity

7. Secrecy of procedure

MERITS OF PARLIAMENTARY GOVERNMENT

1. Harmony between the Legislature and the Executive

2. Faster and smoother decisions

3. Responsible government

4. Prevents Despotism

5. Wider representation of people ensured

6. Ready alternative government

7. Other possible merits
a. Opposition political party has scope to offer a constructive criticism of governmental policies.
b. It is responsible to public opinion.
c. It is flexible and elastic. Whenever there is a crisis, smooth change of government is possible without revolution.
DEMERITS OF PARLIAMENTARY GOVERNMENT
1. No separation of powers

3. Dictatorship of Cabinet

4. Government by amateurs

ASSESSMENT


PRESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT

ESSENTIAL FEATURES

1. President as the real Executive

2. Separation of powers

3. Non-responsible Executive

4. Fixed tenure of the President

MERITS OF PRESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT
1. Separation of powers

2. Stability

3. Expert Government

DEMERITS OF PRESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT
1. Less responsible Executive

2. Deadlocks between Legislature and Executive

3. Rigid government

4. Spoils System

CONCLUSION
The system with which to govern the people has been a matter of considerable interest since ancient times. Within democratic fold, some systems place good faith in the ability of a person to lead the nation impartially and effectively. Presidential system puts faith in a single person and vests in him a lot of powers. The Parliamentary system acts cautiously and vests power in a collective of individuals instead of a single individual. Both the systems have their own strengths and weakness. The stability of Presidential system is as required as the accountability of Cabinet system. The inclusiveness of Council of Ministers in Parliamentary system is challenged by the expertise of the Secretaries/Ministers in the Presidential government. If rigidity of presidential system can create administrative deadlocks, then the flexibility of parliamentary system can also make the administration often paralysed. If anything that matters then it is the men and women who occupy the offices. It clearly depends on how the system is worked and how we institutionalize good practices.