DOCSLIB.ORG

Why Are Arab Ministerial Appointments Being Delayed? Artical Subject : Why Are Arab Ministerial Appointments Being Delayed? Publish Date: 06/03/2017

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Why Are Arab Ministerial Appointments Being Delayed? Artical Subject : Why Are Arab Ministerial Appointments Being Delayed? Publish Date: 06/03/2017 Artical Name : Why are Arab Ministerial Appointments being Delayed? Artical Subject : Why are Arab Ministerial Appointments being Delayed? Publish Date: 06/03/2017 Auther Name: Future for Advanced Research and Studies Subject : There have been instances in the region where the formation of a government is delayed over a lengthy period of time, including, but not limited to, Sudan, Morocco, Lebanon, and Egypt. There are several reasons for this phenomenon, such as authoritative ruling parties, having two ruling regimes, differences among the ruling coalition regarding ministerial appointees, ethnic divisions, differences over regional issues, and questioning of the regime¶s legitimacy and the subsequent rejection of candidates to their posts. This has created a negative backlash in the region and could possibly lead to a halt in the political process, a return to street politics, early parliamentary elections, an exacerbation of domestic issues, hampering of economic progress and an enforcement of international sanctions on political figures. Moroccan ³Blockage´A clear example of delays in ministerial appointments in the region can be seen in Morocco. Since the announcement of the parliamentary results that took place on October 7, the Justice and Development party won the majority, forcing King Mohammad VI to mandate Abdelilah Benkirane to form the new government. Negotiations to create the government have lasted over the last 5 months. The Moroccan press calls this a ³Blockage´or as some have considered it a ³Soft Coup´against the ballot boxes. At the opening session of the National Union for Work (The Syndicate Arm of the Justice and Development Party) on February 18, Benkirane criticized hampering cabinet formation. He stated that it is not possible or even acceptable that for over 5 years the government has worked seamlessly, to the extent that constitutional rights were given up and cooperation prevailed over confrontation, to have the formation of the government be hindered like this.On the eve of Benkirane¶s participation in the 2nd International Parliamentary Forum on social dialogue that took place on February 20, he also mentioned that, King Mohammad the VI has undertaken a vital role by returning Morocco to the AU, attracted large amounts of investment to Morocco and to the people of Africa, and yet the political parties have not been able to form a government. Benkirane, stated ³we must hold steadfast and use democracy to serve our country´It is worth noting that King Mohammed the VI¶s choice for the Secretary General of the Justice and Development party is no longer voluntary, after the Arab Spring and the new Moroccan constitution, it has become mandatory. One of the articles of the new constitution states that the King must appoint the head of the government from the party that leads in the elections, but without any time limits on how soon the new government should be formed. More generally, the factors that have hindered successive governments in some regimes in the Arab world during the last couple of years are represented as follows:Ongoing Differences:1. The Authoritarian Nature of Ruling Regimes: The delay in the announcement of the National Unity Government in Sudan is due to the refusal of the National Council and government-supported political parties in backing down from their positions and shares. They have also not adhered to the outcomes of the National Dialogue regarding the status of the Prime Minister. There are no indicators that point to the formation of the government anytime soon, despite Sudanese citizens looking forward to the creation of the National Unity Government in order to deal with ongoing economic and social challenges faced by the country.Two Captains, One Ship2. Having Two Ruling Regimes: After the Arab Spring, some Arab countries, such as Libya, have witnessed multiple centers of power based on geographical locations. Currently, there are two governments and two parliaments in Libya, and each has their own armed forces. In this respect, it is understandable that there has not been the chance to establish a unity government with Fayez Sarrag (who takes Tripoli as his headquarters), and why he was unable to gain the trust of the internationally recognized parliament in Tobruk during 2016. The deadlock forced authority to be transferred to the Prime Minister, despite pressures from International powers, specifically Europe, to have the new unity government be approved as per the recommendations of the Presidential Council supported by the UN. The difference between both governments is focused on the person who will lead the Ministry of Defense. The negotiations in February 2016 ended with the appointment of that ministry to Colonel Mahdy El Barghaty who is opposed to the head of the Libyan National Army Field Marshal Khalifa Haftar, which pushed the representatives of the Presidential Council Ali El Qatrani and Omar El Eswed to not sign the formation of the new government as the choices were not made in a transparent manner. In the near future, there could possibly be an attempt to include Field Marshal Haftar in the Security and Political Equation in Libya and the Unity Government. The duality in centers of power is also seen in the South of Sudan, as it has helped in hindering the creation of one national unity government and has prevented the warring parties, Silva Kir and Ryack Mashar, from settling their conflict as per the peace accords signed on August 26, 2015. This came as a result of the forces being loyal to Kir insisting that the number of governorates in South Sudan be increased to 28 instead of 10, putting them at an advantage over the others. The case is the same in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and has also hindered the formation of a unity government between the movements of Fatah and Hamas.3. Structural Differences Between the Political Parties: The main reason for the delay in the formation of a government in Morocco is due to the behind-the-scenes pressures exerted by the party members of the ³Asala and Maasaara´party on members of the ³National Unity Party´and the ³Socialist Union´to not enter into a coalition government with the ³Justice and Development Party´It is important to take into consideration that the three parties, should they form an alliance, do not have enough seats to form a government. The JDP has 125 seats, the ³Independence Party´has 46 seats and the ³Progression and Socialist Party´has 12 seats.The total of the three allied parties is 183 seats, and since the majority requires 198 seats, this makes the government formed closer to a minority 9/27/2021 4:39:17 AM 1 / 2 government. Despite there being an alternative to the ongoing issue, the ³National Unity Party´(which recently gained 37 seats) could be a solution to this issue, however, the head of the party Aziz Akhnoosh has called on Benkirane to remove the ³Independence Party´from the coalition government and replace them with the ³Constitutional Unity Party´Akhnosh was not content with that demand, but also asked for Benkirane to re-evaluate his support to certain segments in society through the Maqasa Fund.Benkirane considered that a transgression by a supposed member of the coalition government an affront to the duties and responsibilities of the head of the government. He stated that ³I will not accept from anyone, whomever they were, to act as if they were the head of the government and not myself.´The National Unity Party and the ³People¶s Movement´stated in January their willingness to conduct negotiations under the condition that they include the ³Socialist Union for the People¶s Power´and the ³Constitutional Unity Party´in order to create a strong majority government. However, Benkirane does not want either of the two parties to be part of the coalition government.Lack of Hybrid Solutions4. The Lack of Experience in Creating Coalition Government: The parties and powers in the Arab world are still new to the idea of forming coalition governments that include multiplicity in both a political and social context. A loose term would be ³The Lost Parties,´as they continue to search for mechanisms of support that would help settle internal disputes. This was all the more apparent in Tunisia in 2016 after the ³Tunis Calling Party´lost the majority in parliament when a number of their own party members resigned from the parliament bloc, which would go to show that there were larger internal party conflicts going on at the time.Dividing Up the Gains5. Distributing the Ministerial Packages: the time period for the creation of the Moroccan government might be extended even after the distribution of the Ministerial Posts. There is expected to be an intense conflict around the issue, in light of the lack of negotiating experience the political parties have. Ministerial packages are one of the reasons behind the delay in the creation of a Lebanese government in the Michel Aoun era, as he assigned Saad El Hariri, the head of the ³Future Movement´to create a national unity government in Lebanon as of November 3.The buildup to the creation of a government between the political factions and heads of the various ethnic groups has taken over a month and a half as per the divisions put in place since the Taif Accords in 1990. There has been fear expressed towards the empty seat of the Presidency since the political powers insisted on their positions and demands, as well as the opponents of Michel Aoun who wanted larger shares of the government seats. They even threatened to go to the opposition in case their demands were not met. The outrage does not exclude divisions over the regional crises, especially the war in Syria and Hezbollah¶s part in it.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Politics of Coalition in India
    Journal of Power, Politics & Governance March 2014, Vol. 2, No. 1, pp. 01–11 ISSN: 2372-4919 (Print), 2372-4927 (Online) Copyright © The Author(s). 2014. All Rights Reserved. Published by American Research Institute for Policy Development Politics of Coalition in India Farooq Ahmad Malik1 and Bilal Ahmad Malik2 Abstract The paper wants to highlight the evolution of coalition governments in india. The evaluation of coalition politics and an analysis of how far coalition remains dynamic yet stable. How difficult it is to make policy decisions when coalition of ideologies forms the government. More often coalitions are formed to prevent a common enemy from the government and capturing the power. Equally interesting is the fact a coalition devoid of ideological mornings survives till the enemy is humbled. While making political adjustments, principles may have to be set aside and in this process ideology becomes the first victim. Once the euphoria victory is over, differences come to the surface and the structure collapses like a pack of cards. On the grounds of research, facts and history one has to acknowledge india lives in politics of coalition. Keywords: india, government, coalition, withdrawal, ideology, partner, alliance, politics, union Introduction Coalition is a phenomenon of a multi-party government where a number of minority parties join hands for the purpose of running the government which is otherwise not possible. A coalition is formed when many groups come into common terms with each other and define a common programme or agenda on which they work. A coalition government always remains in pulls and pressures particularly in a multinational country like india.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Establishment Coalition Governments in Southern Europe: Greece and Italy
    Anti-establishment coalition governments in Southern Europe: Greece and Italy Vasiliki Georgiadou Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, 136 Syngrou Ave. 17671, Athens, Greece. Email: [email protected] Jenny Mavropoulou Panteion University of Social and Political Sciences, 136 Syngrou Ave. 17671, Athens, Greece. Email: [email protected] Abstract Anti-establishment parties with either a left-wing or a right-wing ideological slant have been entering contemporary European Democracies with sizeable vote shares. During the Great Recession, the Greek and the Italian party system could be perceived as convergent case-studies for the formation and breakthrough of anti-establishment parties. Given the fact that ideologically diverging anti- establishment parties – the Coalition of the Radical Left - Social Unionist Front (SYRIZA) and the Independent Greeks (ANEL) in the Greek case, as well as the Five Star Movement (M5S) and the League in the Italian one – came to power and formed coalition governments, the primary goal of this article is to enquire into supply-side parameters, exploring potential associations along a range of programmatic stances and policy dimensions that effectuated these governing alliances. Using the Comparative Manifesto Project dataset, our findings confirm the existence of expected programmatic differences as well as a converging policymaking basis between the anti-establishment coalition partners of both governing alliances. Keywords: anti-establishment parties, SYRIZA, ANEL, M5S, League, supply-side,
    [Show full text]
  • Management Challenges at the Centre of Government: Coalition Situations and Government Transitions
    SIGMA Papers No. 22 Management Challenges at the Centre of Government: OECD Coalition Situations and Government Transitions https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5kml614vl4wh-en Unclassified CCET/SIGMA/PUMA(98)1 Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Economiques OLIS : 10-Feb-1998 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development Dist. : 11-Feb-1998 __________________________________________________________________________________________ Or. Eng. SUPPORT FOR IMPROVEMENT IN GOVERNANCE AND MANAGEMENT IN CENTRAL AND EASTERN EUROPEAN COUNTRIES (SIGMA) A JOINT INITIATIVE OF THE OECD/CCET AND EC/PHARE Unclassified CCET/SIGMA/PUMA Cancels & replaces the same document: distributed 26-Jan-1998 ( 98 ) 1 MANAGEMENT CHALLENGES AT THE CENTRE OF GOVERNMENT: COALITION SITUATIONS AND GOVERNMENT TRANSITIONS SIGMA PAPERS: No. 22 Or. En 61747 g . Document complet disponible sur OLIS dans son format d'origine Complete document available on OLIS in its original format CCET/SIGMA/PUMA(98)1 THE SIGMA PROGRAMME SIGMA — Support for Improvement in Governance and Management in Central and Eastern European Countries — is a joint initiative of the OECD Centre for Co-operation with the Economies in Transition and the European Union’s Phare Programme. The initiative supports public administration reform efforts in thirteen countries in transition, and is financed mostly by Phare. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development is an intergovernmental organisation of 29 democracies with advanced market economies. The Centre channels the Organisation’s advice and assistance over a wide range of economic issues to reforming countries in Central and Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. Phare provides grant financing to support its partner countries in Central and Eastern Europe to the stage where they are ready to assume the obligations of membership of the European Union.
    [Show full text]
  • The Liberal Democratic Party: Still the Most Powerful Party in Japan
    The Liberal Democratic Party: Still the Most Powerful Party in Japan Ronald J. Hrebenar and Akira Nakamura The Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) was the national-level ruling party of Japan throughout the entire First Party System (1955–1993). Among the politi- cal systems of non-Socialist developed nations, Japan is unique in that except for a short period after World War II, when a Socialist-centered coalition gov- ernment ruled Japan in 1947–1948, conservative forces have continuously held power on the national level. In 1955, when two conservative parties merged to form the LDP, conservative rule was concentrated within that single organiza- tion and maintained its reign as the governing party for thirty-eight years. It lost its majority in the weak House of Councillors (HC) in the 1989 elections and then lost its control of the crucial House of Representatives (HR) in 1993. However, it returned to the cabinet in January 1996 and gained a majority of HR seats in September 1997. Since the fall of 1997, the LDP has returned to its long-term position as the sole ruling party on the Japanese national level of politics. However shaky the LDP’s current hold, its record is certainly un- precedented among the ruling democratic parties in the world. All of its com- petition for the “years in power” record have fallen by the sidelines over the decades. The Socialist Party of Sweden and the Christian Democratic Party of Italy have both fallen on hard times in recent years, and whereas the Socialists have managed to regain power in Sweden in a coalition, the CDP of Italy has self-destructed while the leftists have run Italy since 1996.
    [Show full text]
  • ESS9 Appendix A3 Political Parties Ed
    APPENDIX A3 POLITICAL PARTIES, ESS9 - 2018 ed. 3.0 Austria 2 Belgium 4 Bulgaria 7 Croatia 8 Cyprus 10 Czechia 12 Denmark 14 Estonia 15 Finland 17 France 19 Germany 20 Hungary 21 Iceland 23 Ireland 25 Italy 26 Latvia 28 Lithuania 31 Montenegro 34 Netherlands 36 Norway 38 Poland 40 Portugal 44 Serbia 47 Slovakia 52 Slovenia 53 Spain 54 Sweden 57 Switzerland 58 United Kingdom 61 Version Notes, ESS9 Appendix A3 POLITICAL PARTIES ESS9 edition 3.0 (published 10.12.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Denmark, Iceland. ESS9 edition 2.0 (published 15.06.20): Changes from previous edition: Additional countries: Croatia, Latvia, Lithuania, Montenegro, Portugal, Slovakia, Spain, Sweden. Austria 1. Political parties Language used in data file: German Year of last election: 2017 Official party names, English 1. Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs (SPÖ) - Social Democratic Party of Austria - 26.9 % names/translation, and size in last 2. Österreichische Volkspartei (ÖVP) - Austrian People's Party - 31.5 % election: 3. Freiheitliche Partei Österreichs (FPÖ) - Freedom Party of Austria - 26.0 % 4. Liste Peter Pilz (PILZ) - PILZ - 4.4 % 5. Die Grünen – Die Grüne Alternative (Grüne) - The Greens – The Green Alternative - 3.8 % 6. Kommunistische Partei Österreichs (KPÖ) - Communist Party of Austria - 0.8 % 7. NEOS – Das Neue Österreich und Liberales Forum (NEOS) - NEOS – The New Austria and Liberal Forum - 5.3 % 8. G!LT - Verein zur Förderung der Offenen Demokratie (GILT) - My Vote Counts! - 1.0 % Description of political parties listed 1. The Social Democratic Party (Sozialdemokratische Partei Österreichs, or SPÖ) is a social above democratic/center-left political party that was founded in 1888 as the Social Democratic Worker's Party (Sozialdemokratische Arbeiterpartei, or SDAP), when Victor Adler managed to unite the various opposing factions.
    [Show full text]
  • How Electoral Agency Shapes the Political Logic of Costs and Benefits
    Coalition Parties versus Coalitions of Parties: How Electoral Agency Shapes the Political Logic of Costs and Benefits by Kathleen Bawn Department of Political Science UCLA and Frances Rosenbluth Department of Political Science Yale University Draft 1.10 August 2002 Abstract This paper argues that governments formed from post-election coalitions (majority coalition governments in PR systems) and pre-election coalitions (majority parties in SMD systems) aggregate the interests of voters in systematically different ways. We show that the multiple policy dimensional policy space that emerges from PR rules motivate parties in the government coalition to logroll projects among themselves without internalizing the costs of those projects in the same way that a majoritarian party would be forced to do. The size of government should therefore tend to be larger in PR systems. We further show that, although centrifugal electoral incentives dominate in PR systems, some incentives towards coalescence across groups and across parties exist through the greater likelihood that large parties have in becoming a member of a minimal winning coalition of parties. This paper was prepared for presentation at the annual meetings of the American Political Science Association, held in Boston, Massachusetts, August 28-September 2. Frances Rosenbluth would like to thank the Yale Provost Office and the Yale Leitner Program in International Political Economy for funding. We gratefully acknowledge the able research assistance of Abbie Erler and Mathias Hounpke in conducting this research. Introduction Democratic government is government by coalition. In many parliamentary systems, governments are explicit multi-party coalitions. Even in cases of single party government, a party that wins a parliamentary majority represents -- almost by definition -- a coalition of interests.
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition Formation and the Regime Divide in Central Europe
    Program on Central & Eastern Europe Working Paper Series #52, j\Tovember 1999 Coalition Formation and the Regime Divide in Central Europe Anna Grzymala-Busse· Weatherhead Center for International Affairs Harvard University Cambridge, lvlA 02138 Abstract The study examines the formation of coalitions in East Central Europe after the democratic transi­ tions of 1989. Existing explanations of coalition formations, which focus on either office-seeking and minimum wmning considerations, or on policy-seeking and spatial ideological convergence. However, they fail to account for the coalition patterns in the new democracies of East Central Europe. Instead, these parties' flrst goal is to develop clear and consistent reputations. To that end, they will form coalitions exclusively within the two camps of the regime divide: that is, amongst par­ ties stemming from the former communist parties, and those with roots in the former opposition to the communist regimes. The two corollaries are that defectors are punished at unusually high rates, and the communist party successors seek, rather than are sought for, coalitions. This model explains 85% of the coalitions that formed in the region after 1989. The study then examines the communist successor parties, and how their efforts illustrate these dynamics . • I would like to thank Grzegorz Ekiert, Gary King, Kenneth Shepsle, Michael Tomz, and the participants ofthe Faculty Workshop at Yale University for their helpful comments. 2 I. Introduction The patterns of coalition fonnation in East Central Europe are as diverse as they are puzzling. Since the ability to fonn stable governing coalitions is a basic precondition of effective democratic governance in multi-party parliamentary systems, several explanations have emerged of how political parties fonn such coalitions.
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition Government in India : a Critical Analysis
    Indian J. Soc.& Pol. 04(02):2017:23-26 ISSN 2348-0084(P) ISSN 2455-2127(O) COALITION GOVERNMENT IN INDIA : A CRITICAL ANALYSIS KUSUM LATA1 1Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science,Government Girls College Bhilwara, Rajasthan, India ABSTRACT Present research paper provides an overview of the functioning of coalition governments in the country and understanding of the system of coalition and an evaluation of its implications for society with an Indian Experience. Coalition Politics is based on a system of governance by a group of political parties or by several political parties. After general election, when there is no party in a position to get a majority in the parliament and some parties Form a coalition alliance. Thus this government is said a coalition Government. KEY WORDS : Congress, Centre Coalition, Democracy, Election Government, India, Nation, Politics State, Union, Provinces, Parliament. INTRODUCTION for at least two of the players (or actors) the possibility that they can do better by co-coordinating their resources India is the largest demo-critic country in the than by acting alone (Ram 2007). world. Indian political system is a multiparty system. There are so many national and regional parties. They COALITION GOVERNMENT IN INDIA participant in general election. Political parties are The congress party, though recognized as the indispensable to any democratic system. They play the Leviathan of Indian politics, emerged as the torch bearer most important role in the Electoral process in setting up of the national movement largely as a coalitional force. It candidates and conducting election campaigns. The brought within its fold various multitudes of different parliamentary democracy consists of an elected political shades and leadership with the singular objective representative parliament which is supreme, a cabinet of redeeming the country of imperialist hegemony of the collectively responsible to parliament, a prime minister British.
    [Show full text]
  • Governments of National Unity: Analyzing the Conditions Influencing Dissolution
    Governments of National Unity: Analyzing the Conditions Influencing Dissolution Prepared for the U.S. Government Office of South Asia Analysis By Dylan Blake Olivia Butler Ryan Dunk Michelle Duren Katie Jenkins Joel Lashmore Allison Sambo Workshop in International Public Affairs Spring 2015 ©2015 Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System All rights reserved. For an online copy, see www.lafollette.wisc.edu/research-public-service/workshops-in-public-affairs [email protected] The Robert M. La Follette School of Public Affairs is a teaching and research department of the University of Wisconsin–Madison. The school takes no stand on policy issues; opinions expressed in these pages reflect the views of the authors. The University of Wisconsin–Madison is an equal opportunity and affirmative-action educator and employer. We promote excellence through diversity in all programs. Table of Contents List of Tables ................................................................................................................................. iv List of Figures ................................................................................................................................ iv Foreword ......................................................................................................................................... v Acknowledgments .......................................................................................................................... vi Executive Summary .....................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition Government, Legislative Institutions, and Public Policy in Parliamentary Democracies
    Coalition Government, Legislative Institutions, and Public Policy in Parliamentary Democracies Lanny W. Martin Bocconi University Georg Vanberg Duke University Abstract: Most democracies are governed by coalitions, comprising multiple political parties with conflicting policy positions. The prevalence of these governments poses a significant question: Which parties’ electoral commitments are ultimately reflected in government policy? Recent theories have challenged our understanding of multiparty government, arguing that the relative influence of coalition parties depends crucially on institutional context. Specifically, where institutions allow credible enforcement of bargains, policy should reflect a compromise among all governing parties; where such institutions are absent, the preferences of parties controlling the relevant ministries should prevail. Critically, empirical work has thus far failed to provide direct evidence for this conditional relationship. Analyzing changes in social protection policies in 15 parliamentary democracies, we provide the first systematic evidence that the strength of legislative institutions significantly shapes the relative policy influence of coalition parties. Our findings have implications for our understanding of coalition government, policymaking, and electoral responsiveness. Replication Materials: The data and materials required to verify the computational reproducibility of the results, procedures and analyses in this article are available on the American Journal of Political Science Dataverse
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition in a Plurality System: Explaining Party System
    Coalition in a Plurality System: Explaining Party System Fragmentation in Britain Jane Green Ed Fieldhouse Chris Prosser University of Manchester Paper prepared for the UC Berkeley British Politics Group election conference, 2nd September 2015. Abstract Electoral system theories expect proportional systems to enhance minor party voting and plurality electoral systems to reduce it. This paper illustrates how the likelihood of coalition government results in incentives to vote for minor parties in the absence of proportional representation. We advance a theory of why expectations of coalition government enhance strategic and sincere voting for minor parties. We demonstrate support for our theory using analyses of vote choices in the 2015 British general election. The findings of this paper are important for electoral system theories. They reveal that so-called proportional electoral system effects may arise, in part, due to the presence of coalition government that so often accompanies proportional representation. The findings also shed light on an important trend in British politics towards the fragmentation of the party system and a marked increase in this tendency in the 2015 British general election. 2 The 2015 general election result saw the Conservative party win a majority of seats in the House of Commons after a period of governing in coalition with the Liberal Democrats. At first glance the result may look like a return to the classic two-party majoritarian government under a plurality electoral system. But this conclusion would be wrong. 2015 represents a high watermark for votes for 'other' parties - those parties challenging the traditional establishment parties in Westminster. Vote shares for UKIP leapt from 3.1% to 12.6%, the Greens from 1.0% to 3.8%, the SNP leapt from 19.9% to 50% in Scotland and Plaid Cymru saw a small increase from 11.3% to 12.1% in Wales.
    [Show full text]
  • Coalition Governments in India: the Way Forward
    International Journal of Research in Engineering, IT and Social Sciences ISSN 2250-0558, Impact Factor: 6.452, Volume 6 Issue 03, March 2016 Coalition governments in India: The way forward Veena.K Assistant professor, Department of Political Science & Research scholar (BU), Government Arts College, Bangalore -560001 ABSTRACT Indian federal system says clearly the „distribution of power „has been assured by the constitution for the „effective administration‟ and it is reflected in Indian parliamentary democracy. India has a multi party system where there is a number of national and regional political party because of which there is an emergence of coalition governments in India. The governments have been formed at the centre or at the state based on the „First –past- the- post-electoral system‟ in the Indian political system. Electoral politics of India before independence and after independence witnessed major changes in forming government, its running and completing of its tenure. Elections in India will be held once in five years to choose the leader and peoples‟ representatives, wherein the election commission and delimitation commission play significant roles. Indian democratically elected government is chosen by its large population of different sectors such as, region, religion, caste, language etc, but the uneven development of regions and non performance of national parties resulted in rise of regional political parties in India. Regional political parties are the pillars of the coalitions today in making or breaking but capturing the power is the ultimate goal of any of the party. Keywords: Democracy, Political Parties, Coalitions, Politics, Stability, regions, First-Past- The - Post, Governments Indian political system takes place within the framework of a constitution.
    [Show full text]