Presidential Government vs. Parliamentary

  • View
    18

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

comparison between Presi. Govnt and Parlia.

Text of Presidential Government vs. Parliamentary

READINGS: PRESIDENTIAL VERSUS PARLIAMENTARYPresidential and Parliamentary forms of government are two different systems of government, which are available in all countries of the world. In the world, some are in favor of Presidential form of Government and some are in favor of Parliament form of Government.Some countries which were under colonial system had adopted the system left by their colonizers. Except: USA adopted Presidential form of Government after getting Independence from UK. (Presidential system of Government in USA is very successful since long because of its Constitution. Constitution of the USA well defines the limitations of the three Institutes (1) Executive (2) Legislature (3) Judicature. Her constitution precisely contains the doctrine of Separation of Power between these three pillars.)Nigeria also adopted the Presidential form of Government after getting independence from France. Pakistan and India had also adopted Parliamentary form of Government after getting independence from United Kingdom, which was there at that time.

Parliamentary Form of GovernmentIt is a multi-partyform of governmentin which the executive is formally dependent on the legislature. There is no clear-cut separation between the legislative and executive branches of government.

The executive is typically called the cabinet, and headed by a prime minister or premier who is considered the head of government. In most parliamentary systems, the prime minister and the members of the cabinet are also members of the legislature. The leader of the leading party in the parliament is often appointed as the prime minister. In many countries, the cabinet or single members thereof can be removed by the parliament through a vote of no confidence. Theexecutiveis constitutionally answerable to the parliament. Theprime ministeris almost always the leader of the majority party in the lower house of parliament, but only holds his or her office as long as the "confidence of the house" is maintained. If members of the lower house lose faith in the leader for whatever reason, they can call avote of no confidenceand force the PM to resign.Also, the executive often can dissolve the parliament and call extra-ordinary elections.Under this system, the roles of head of state and head of government are more or less separated. In most parliamentary systems, the head of state is primarily a ceremonial position, often a monarch or president, performing duties without much political relevance. The King or Queen is now ceremonial. All the functions of Government are being controlled by the UK Parliament. This is too much independent Parliament in the world.Parliamentary systems vary as to the degree to which they have a formal written constitution and the degree to which that constitution describes the day to day working of the government. They also vary as to the number of parties within the system and the dynamics between the parties. Also, relations between the central government and local governments vary in parliamentary systems.

Comparative Study of Parliamentary and Presidential Forms of Government1) In the Parliamentary system, the Prime Minister and Chief Minister are totally dependent upon their respective Legislatures in the matter of selection of Ministers.Under the Presidential system, on the other hand, the President is free to choose his cabinet of ministers from outside the members of the legislature2) As the ministers are chosen from party men in the Parliamentary form, the party is deprived of capable persons needed to keep the organization united, homogenous, strong and viable. As a result of this drain of talent from the party to government, the party organization grows weak, and indiscipline and infighting, are the result.The Presidential system is largely free from these drawbacks, as well as from rivalry and friction between the party bosses and the ministerial wing. The party and the government thus work in harmony.(4)The politics of defection is the worst fault of the Parliamentary form. Defections become the order of the day. This result in corruption, nepotism, casteism, regionalism, and often short lived coalition government are formed. Defection leads to multiplication of political parties, political instability comes in the way of constructive work. This generates the pressure groups, which always blackmail the ruling party as well as opposition party. Similarly, these groups also help the bureaucracy in its effort to derail the system. This evil is unheard of in the other system.In Presidential system of Government, one man almost all men because he possess the mandate to do which he thinks fit and go ahead. No one can assert pressure on him.(5) The legislators and M.P's are not free to vote according to their conscience in the Parliamentary system. They must obey the party-whip or face expulsion.The Presidential system is superior in this respect.Advantages of Presidential Form of GovernmentSalient features of Presidential system of Government are as under:-1. A strong and stable Government2. An able and mature ministry through direct induction of top professionals and technocrats3. Legislator's freedom from the fear or 'party whip' resulting separation of the Executive from the Legislature4. Gradual emergency of the two party-systems as a result of pre-election coalition of like-minded parties, before the very eyes of the electorate5. Bureaucracy remains under the mature surveillance of political leadership, and6. Rampant defections and uneasy post-election coalitions tend to disappear.Advantages of Parliamentary Form of GovernmentSalient features of the Parliamentary form of Government are as under:-1. Selection of Prime Minister on the will of majority of members of the Parliament.2. Chosen of members by the voting power of people.3. Decisions on issues on the basis of consensus of majority.4. Option of citizen to choose best one.5. Interest of the people in the affairs of the country. Consequently, development of public opinion.6. Manifesto of the parties for the general public to decide mandate.7. Criticism by the opposition.8. Equal representation of all constituencies either urban or rural.9. Legislation according to the will of the people by the members representing them in the parliament.Disadvantages of Presidential Form of GovernmentNo doubt that Presidential form of Government has many advantages and greater stability and sanity in the politics of a country. However, it has the following drawbacks:-1. By making the President and his colleagues independent of the Legislature, it makes the executive too powerful and this carries within it seeds of Dictatorship.2. President considers himself always right because of absolute power, which causes danger to the integrity of country.3. President selects always his closest friends even not intelligent and remote to their expertise and experience.4. Sometimes President makes covenant against the country to save his regime.5. In Presidential System, reign of Government remains in few hands. Resultantly few minds apply on some important issues.Disadvantages of Parliamentary Form of GovernmentDrawbacks of the Parliamentary form of Government are as under:-1. Delay in decisions.2. Ministers are selected by the Prime Minister on the basis of influence in the party.3. Newly elected members sometimes neglected even competent in their fields.4. Misuse of authority by the members of Parliamentary because of majority.5. Members of Parliament cannot go against the partys policy. Even they cannot vote according to their conscience.6. Nomination of illiterate members as ministers causing strongest bureaucracy.7. Influence of small factions on the political parties.Constitutional Development in PakistanPakistan had got independence from United Kingdom. Before partition of Sub Continent, Britain who are famous for their democratic norms promulgates Indian Act 1935, having Parliamentary system of Government. At the time of partition it was impossible for newly emerged countries Pakistan and India to formulate their new Constitution from the day one. Thats why both the countries adopted all the Acts, Ordinances without any change till the finalization of their own constitutions. The first Governor General Quaid-e-Azam Muhammad Ali Jinnah, constituted Pakistans first Constituent Assembly to formulate a Constitution in the light of Objective Resolution 1940. After a long journey towards Constitution, at last Pakistans Constituent Assembly succeeded in formation of first Constitution in 1956. This Constitution had the Parliamentary form of Government. It was abrogated by the usurper Gen Ayub and he later promulgated new experiment in the form of 2ndConstitution 1962, which had the Presidential form of Government. This system of Government was against the will of the citizen of Pakistan, which resulted separation of East Pakistan because they had grown up under the Parliamentary norms, which was in their genetic. Thats why they were loved to that system. However, another new Constitution 1973 having the Parliamentary forms of Government promulgated in the light of demand and desire of people of Pakistan, which is still in use.Conclusion of ResearchEvery nation should adopt that system which is most suitable to the citizen of that country instead following the system left by their master, because this tendency do not develop the system of government. China is the example, who adopted neither Presidential and Parliament system of Government nor communism. There is the system having combination of Presidential and Parliamentary as well as communist systems of Government. For example, there is Peoples Procuratorate, which is an independent elected body for five years having power to lodge protest with the Supreme Peoples Court against any decision/order passed by Supreme Court. As per my research there is no countries, which have such system of check and balance. U