Thanks to india's parliamentary system, inherited from the british, the country holds elections in one or more of its 29 state assemblies every six months or so that gives the leadership in new delhi little opportunity to leave campaigning behind and focus on governance. And k m munshi , about the adoption of parliamentary form of government for indian political close nexus between the executive and the legislature- the constitution makers adopted a partial 4 sa aiyar, obama shows why india must not seek a presidential system, the times of india blogs as on. India after independence adopted the parliamentary form of governance despite this, debates over the merits or not of the presidential govt form have never subsided the swaran singh committee appointed in 1984 to suggest such a move or not, also recommended the latter despite this, the inherent. Parliamentary system of governance: india has a parliamentary system which is all about parties whereas the us has a presidential form of government wherein the president is both head of state and government if such debates are to be organised in india, they will have to feature leaders of different.
A semi-presidential system or dual executive system is a system of government in which a president exists alongside a prime minister and a cabinet, with the latter two being responsible to the legislature of a state it differs from a parliamentary republic in that it has a popularly elected head of state, who is more than a purely. In my last column, against the backdrop of current events, i inveighed against the parliamentary system as it has worked in india the argument merits completion today to summarise (and extrapolate from) the case i made last time: our parliamentary system has created a unique breed of legislator, largely. Should india also have us-style presidential debates there are already many debates on whether india also needs to adopt presidential form of government their federal system and our parliamentary democracy have nothing in common for them the head of the government as well as the states is the same person,.
Since india adopted a parliamentary form of government in 1950, the possibility of its replacement by the obvious alternative, the presidential system, has occasionally been considered the debate on the merits and demerits of the presidential versus the parliamentary form of government has acquired a. Presidential system is better i am a citizen of india, by birth, and a retired hsc physics / chemistry i have exercised my franchise of voting in many elections therefore my following points will be useful in having a true government, which will really take care of the society 1) first of all, i am against the parliamentary system.
There are various reasons why presidential form of government cannot be adopted in india these could be explained in several aspects responsibility aspect: dr br ambedkar pointed out that democratic govt should be stable as well as responsible but there was no such system which could. Read why india needs the presidential system book reviews & author details and more at amazonin dr ambedkar, mahatma gandhi, ma jinnah, sardar patel and many other top leaders strongly opposed india's adoption of the parliamentary system you will agree at the end that we need presidential system. Narendra modi's rise owes much to his image as a decisive, efficient go-getter a recent magazine poll showed 86% of new voters wanting an “authoritative and decisive” prime minister they hate the corrupt bumbling and drift of the upa government for the same reason, many indians favour a.
A group of representatives wanted to adopt presidential form of government one admirer of presidential form of government, ram narayan singh argued that 'the parliamentary system must go i have bitter experience of working in the provinces in the presidential system, it is easy to find an honest president, but it is not so. At one time or another, dr ambedkar, mahatma gandhi, ma jinnah, sardar patel and many other top leaders strongly opposed india s adoption of the parliamentary system history has proven them right given its diversity, size, and communal and community divisions, the country needed a truly federal setup not the. A parliamentary form of government is one in which the the legislative branch supersedes the executive and the president is only ceremonial head of state system[iv] it was suggested that, in order to prevent the recurrence of similar situations, india should adopt a stronger presidential rule in the country. Maybe, its time to once again debate whether india should abandon the westminster form of government and shift to the presidential system.
If any of the members misuses the power, people should have the right to question it adopting the presidential form of government takes that right away from the people democracy has to be protected in a country like india democracy is what we stand for re: parliamentary or presidential - which form of government is. The adoption of a presidential system in turkey will be a “key structural reform,” turkish prime minister binali yıldırım has argued despite these, turkey is growing almost twice as much as the world average if we exclude china and india turkey offers more opportunities to investors than many others do.
He has argued in many writings and speeches (see links below) that the parliamentary system adopted by the country at independence 70 years ago was never suitable for indian but since the individual is elected in order to be part of a majority that will form the government, party affiliations matter. For unlimited free mock tests sign up to our official website wwwstudylanein -~ -~~-~~~-~~-~- please watch: upsc polity basic structure of the constitution. Presidential) the indian president powers duties and functions of the president appointment of head of the government dissolution in a country like usa, uk or india, it is not possible to adopt direct model of parliamentary system in india in the last fifty years, it will not be out.
He has inherited a system of government that allows him to be all powerful and that is in line with most indians' false impression of the us presidency it is too early to say whether modi will do anything to fix india's system but the signs are not promising first of all, there are good reasons why modi wouldn't. The united states (us) has a presidential system, as do countries it has influenced regionally, culturally or militarily  with the exception of the us, presidential systems in the past have often been associated with politically unstable and authoritarian regimes countries that have adopted a form of the parliamentarianism. Now the time has come for india to shift from parliamentary form to the presidential form of government only then will we be able to choose the best person to bring change and make our long awaited dreams a reality let the intelligent and educated people from excellent educational background like that of harvard run this. Please check my answer q should india switch to presidential system considering the frequent deadlocks in the indian parliament answer- framers of the constitution of india while framing the constitution adopted the parliamentary system in place of presidential system because they were very much aware about the.