DOCSLIB.ORG

Presidential Form of Government

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Presidential Form of Government PRESIDENTIAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT Introduction Government is one of the essential elements of the State. It is the working agency of the State. The importance of the Government in modern times is highly felt. Attempts have been made from time to time to classify the various forms of Government. A presidential system is a democratic and republican system of government where a head of government leads an executive branch that is separate from the legislative branch. This head of government is in most cases also the head of state, which is called president. In presidential countries, the executive is elected and is not responsible to the legislature, which cannot in normal circumstances dismiss it. Such dismissal is possible, however, in uncommon cases, often through impeachment. According to Garner, “Presidential Government is that system in which the executive (including both the Head of the State and his ministers) is constitutionally independent of the legislature in respect to the duration of his or their tenure and irresponsible to it for his or their political policies”. Meaning The title "president" has persisted from a time when such person personally presided over the governing body, as with the President of the Continental Congress in the early United States, prior to the executive function being split into a separate branch of government. There is an intermediary system called semi-presidentialism. Countries that feature a presidential or semi-presidential system of government are not the exclusive users of the title of president. Heads of state of parliamentary republics, largely ceremonial in most cases, are called presidents. Dictators or leaders of one-party states, popularly elected or not, are also often called presidents. Presidentialism is the dominant form of government in the continental Americas. It is also prevalent in Central and southern West Africa and in Central Asia. Features of the Presidential form of Government Maurice Duverger stated that the presidential system is characterized by the principle of the separation of powers, presidential elections by means of universal suffrage, presidential appointment and removal of ministers and because none of them are not politically responsible to the parliament. President is the Real Head The Executive Power is undivided. In the Presidential system, the chief of the state is not merely the titular executive but he is real executive and actually exercises the powers which the constitution and laws confer upon him. In such a system, the President is the real head. He is the head of state as well as the head of government. In this system, the President enjoys real powers of the government. He is not responsible to the legislature for his administration and policies. Separation of Powers There is separation of powers in the Presidential form of government. In this system the executive and legislature are separate from each other and they have equal status. The President is elected by people. Neither he nor his ministers are drawn from the legislature. They are not accountable to it. They are independent of the legislature. He has a fixed tenure. He cannot be easily ousted from office by the legislature. The only method of his ouster from office is impeachment which is a very difficult process. On the other hand, the President also cannot dissolve the legislature. Further, the judiciary is independent of both the executive and the legislature. Thus, there is not only separation of powers, but also check and balance in the Presidential system. Checks and Balances Though the three organs of the government are kept apart, they are also connected by the system of checks and balances. Each organ of government exercises checks on the other two organs so that a sort of balance is established. Ministers are Accountable to the President In a Presidential government, the President enjoys real powers of the administration and he exercises all those powers, which are given to him under the constitution and the law. The President appoints his ministers (or secretaries) who stay in office during his pleasure. They do not belong to the legislature. Nor are they responsible to it. They are appointed on the basis of their experience and expertise. The secretaries help the president in the administration and it depends upon the will of the president to accept or reject their advice. They are 'President's men'. He can remove them from office if he is not happy with them. Non-Responsibility to the Legislature In a Presidential government the President and his secretaries are not responsible to the legislature. The legislature cannot remove them through a vote of no-confidence. Moreover, an adjournment motion or a censure motion cannot be brought against them. The President and his secretaries are not the members of legislature and they do not attend its sessions. Thus, they cannot be asked questions and supplementary questions. Fixed Tenure In a Presidential government, the President is elected for a fixed tenure and except through impeachment for the violation of the constitution, he cannot be removed from his office before the expiry of his term. The tenure of office cannot be lessened or increased under any circumstances. Transparency In a presidential system, the balance of power tends to be more transparent since it aims at defining the limits between the Executive and Legislative branches, even though there are many collaboration alliances between them, and that members of one are not members of the other at the same time, though there are exceptions. Merits: More Democratic Because of the twin principles of separation of powers and check and balance, there is no concentration of powers in the same man or in the same body. As a result, there is more of democracy in this system. Stability and Continuity As both the President and the legislature enjoy fixed terms of office, there is political stability. There is continuity of policy. As a result, the government can think of long-term policies. People's President The President is directly elected by people. He has thus reason to think that he enjoys more of people's confidence and support than the Prime Minister in the Parliamentary system. More Efficient The President is free to choose his ministers. The Senate, the Upper House of American Congress, may or may not ratify such appointments, but it cannot impose its choice on the President. The President has thus the freedom to appoint very competent persons as his Ministers or Secretaries on the basis of their experience and expertise. They are accountable only to the President and not to the Congress. As a result, they have time to concentrate on their work and to do their duty efficiently. Prompt and Bold Decisions The President, being all powerful, is in a position to take bold and prompt decisions. His ministers, being subordinate to him, cannot tie hands. They may advise him, but they have to implement his decisions. Best suited to Deal with Emergencies The Presidential system is more effective in tackling emergencies as there is unity of control and concentration of executive powers in person (President). He can react quickly to any national crisis by taking prompt decisions. There is hardly any need for him to convince others on the spot that the decision he going to take is good for the nation. More Suitable for Multi-Party System The multiparty system is prone to political instability. Political parties with different interests pull the political system in different directions. In order to check this, there is the need of a strong executive and the Presidential government is best suited to establish stability in a multiparty system. Symbol of National Unity and Integrity The Presidential executive is of help in forging unity in the nation consisting of diverse regions, communities and cult. As he is directly elected by people, they look upon him as the symbol of their unity. Demerits: Dictatorial The Presidential executive is likely to be authoritarian. As all executive powers are concentrated in the hands of the President and he is not accountable to legislature, he may be tempted to abuse powers and behave in a dictatorial manner. Conflict and Deadlock As the President and his ministers are not members of legislature, they find it difficult to persuade the members of the latter to accept proposals. The legislature is inclined to find fault with the President, and vice versa. Conflict between the executive and the legislature leads to deadlock in the administration. Absence of Accountability The executive is not accountable to the legislature. Nor is it accountable to people. The people directly elect their President; they cannot recall him even if they find him incompetent or dishonest or useless. President can be removed from office by the legislature through impeachment, which is a very difficult process. Rigidity The Presidential system is too rigid to adapt itself to sudden changes in circumstances. To manage a crisis, the ministers including the Prime Minister in Parliamentary system can be replaced. But, however great the need, the President in a Presidential system cannot be replaced during his tenure. Weak Foreign Policy In the field of foreign policy, the President has handicaps. He has no power to declare a war even when his country is attacked by enemy. This power belongs to the Congress. Similarly, the treaty that he may conclude with another country is not valid if it is not ratified by the Senate. There is thus some validity in the comment of Gamer that the Presidential system government is 'autocratic, irresponsible and dangerous'. .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Parliamentary, Presidential and Semi-Presidential Democracies Democracies Are Often Classified According to the Form of Government That They Have
    Parliamentary, Presidential and Semi-Presidential Democracies Democracies are often classified according to the form of government that they have: • Parliamentary • Presidential • Semi-Presidential Legislative responsibility refers to a situation in which a legislative majority has the constitutional power to remove a government from office without cause. A vote of confidence is initiated by the government { the government must resign if it fails to obtain a legislative majority. A vote of no confidence is initiated by the legislature { the government must resign if it fails to obtain a legislative majority. A constructive vote of no confidence must indicate who will replace the government if the incumbent loses a vote of no confidence. A vote of no confidence is initiated by the legislature { the government must resign if it fails to obtain a legislative majority. A constructive vote of no confidence must indicate who will replace the government if the incumbent loses a vote of no confidence. A vote of confidence is initiated by the government { the government must resign if it fails to obtain a legislative majority. The defining feature of presidential democracies is that they do not have legislative responsibility. • US Government Shutdown, click here In contrast, parliamentary and semi-presidential democracies both have legislative responsibility. • PM Question Time (UK), click here In addition to legislative responsibility, semi-presidential democracies also have a head of state who is popularly elected for a fixed term. A head of state is popularly elected if she is elected through a process where voters either (i) cast a ballot directly for a candidate or (ii) they cast ballots to elect an electoral college, whose sole purpose is to elect the head of state.
    [Show full text]
  • Presidential Or Parliamentary Does It Make a Difference? Juan J. Linz
    VrA Democracy: Presidential or Parliamentary Does it Make a Difference? Juan J. Linz Pelatiah Pert Professor of Political and Social Sciences Yale University July 1985 Paper prepared for the project, "The Role of Political Parties in the Return to Democracy in the Southern Cone," sponsored by the Latin American Program of the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, and the World Peace Foundation Copyright © 1985 by Juan J. Linz / INTRODUCTION In recent decades renewed efforts have been made to study and understand the variety of political democracies, but most of those analyses have focused on the patterns of political conflict and more specifically on party systems and coalition formation, in contrast to the attention of many classical writers on the institutional arrangements. With the exception of the large literature on the impact of electorul systems on the shaping of party systems generated by the early writings of Ferdinand Hermens and the classic work by Maurice Duverger, as well as the writings of Douglas Rae and Giovanni Sartori, there has been little attention paid by political scientists to the role of political institutions except in the study of particular countries. Debates about monarchy and republic, parliamentary and presidential regimes, the unitary state and federalism have receded into oblivion and not entered the current debates about the functioning of democra-ic and political institutions and practices, including their effect on the party systems. At a time when a number of countries initiate the process of writing or rewriting constitu­ tions, some of those issues should regain salience and become part of what Sartori has called "political engineering" in an effort to set the basis of democratic consolidation and stability.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Rights, Separation of Powers and Devolution in the Kenyan Constitution, 2010: Comparison and Lessons for Eac Member States
    HUMAN RIGHTS, SEPARATION OF POWERS AND DEVOLUTION IN THE KENYAN CONSTITUTION, 2010: COMPARISON AND LESSONS FOR EAC MEMBER STATES ∗∗∗ By Prof. Christian Roschmann, Mr. Peter Wendoh & Mr. Steve Ogolla Abstract This paper is essentially a study of the new governance system in Kenya and an explanation why constitutional democracy holds the key to the promotion of human rights; entrenchment of the rule of law and the realisation of good governance. The paper suggests that the concept of constitutional democracy is not the same thing as constitutional government; accordingly, to achieve constitutional democracy, a government must be both constitutional and democratic. Further, this paper focuses on the structures, powers and organizing principles of the devolved governance and explores the challenges that lie ahead to ensure that constitutional democracy endures and is strengthened. The Constitution of Kenya, 2010 seeks to establish a society permeated by the spirit of liberty and democracy, the spirit of the laws and the habit of order. This paper proceeds from the assumption that although the constitutional models across the East Africa Community vary considerably, they share common themes that led to the demise of constitutional democracy, human rights violations and weaker institutions of government. The design and architecture of Kenya’s new constitution may, therefore, herald the beginning of the return of the East Africa Community to constitutional democracy. A. Introduction A historical inquiry of the foundations of Kenya’s political system, traceable to the colonial rule, underscores the very political basis of Kenya’s Constitution. Lord Delamere, a pioneer European farmer in Kenya believed the extension of European civilisation was desirable 1.
    [Show full text]
  • PRESIDENTIAL FORM of GOVERNMENT the Presidential Form of Govt Is Based on the Principle of Separation of Power Between the Executive and Legislature
    PRESIDENTIAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT The presidential form of govt is based on the principle of separation of power between the executive and legislature. Under this system the executive is independent from the control of legislature. Definition: in the opinion of Gettell,” presidential government is that form in which the chief executive is independent of the legislature as to his tenure and to a large extent, as to his policies and acts. In this system, the head of the state is real executive.” According to D.V. Verney.” The term presidential has been chosen because in this system the office of the head of the government and head of state is combined in president.” The above definitions summarize two features of the presidential executive i.e its independence and non-responsibility to the legislature as well as its definite tenure and united structure. At present countries like USA, Brazil, Sri Lanka etc are having presidential form of government. Department of Political Science Jawaharlal Nehru College, Pasighat FEATURES OF PRESIDENTIAL FORM OF GOVERNMENT: 1. Real head of the state: in this system the head of the state is the real executive head. 2. Seperation of powers: the presidential form of government is based on the principle of separation of power among the three organs of the government. The executive is not responsible to legislature. The executive cannot dissolve the legislature. And the judiciary is independent from executive and legislature. 3. Principle of checks and balances: All the three organs of the government is separated from each other but all are checking each other and restraining each other from any type of transgression of their power and functions.
    [Show full text]
  • Australia's System of Government
    61 Australia’s system of government Australia is a federation, a constitutional monarchy and a parliamentary democracy. This means that Australia: Has a Queen, who resides in the United Kingdom and is represented in Australia by a Governor-General. Is governed by a ministry headed by the Prime Minister. Has a two-chamber Commonwealth Parliament to make laws. A government, led by the Prime Minister, which must have a majority of seats in the House of Representatives. Has eight State and Territory Parliaments. This model of government is often referred to as the Westminster System, because it derives from the United Kingdom parliament at Westminster. A Federation of States Australia is a federation of six states, each of which was until 1901 a separate British colony. The states – New South Wales, Victoria, Queensland, Western Australia, South Australia and Tasmania - each have their own governments, which in most respects are very similar to those of the federal government. Each state has a Governor, with a Premier as head of government. Each state also has a two-chambered Parliament, except Queensland which has had only one chamber since 1921. There are also two self-governing territories: the Australian Capital Territory and the Northern Territory. The federal government has no power to override the decisions of state governments except in accordance with the federal Constitution, but it can and does exercise that power over territories. A Constitutional Monarchy Australia is an independent nation, but it shares a monarchy with the United Kingdom and many other countries, including Canada and New Zealand. The Queen is the head of the Commonwealth of Australia, but with her powers delegated to the Governor-General by the Constitution.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Commander-In-Chief Power
    Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2008 On the Commander-In-Chief Power David Luban Georgetown University Law Center, [email protected] Georgetown Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 1026302 This paper can be downloaded free of charge from: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub/598 http://ssrn.com/abstract=1026302 81 S. Cal. L. Rev. 477-571 (2008) This open-access article is brought to you by the Georgetown Law Library. Posted with permission of the author. Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.georgetown.edu/facpub Part of the Constitutional Law Commons ON THE COMMANDER IN CHIEF POWER ∗ DAVID LUBAN BRADBURY: Obviously, the Hamdan decision, Senator, does implicitly recognize that we’re in a war, that the President’s war powers were triggered by the attacks on the country, and that [the] law of war paradigm applies. That’s what the whole case was about. LEAHY: Was the President right or was he wrong? BRADBURY: It’s under the law of war that we . LEAHY: Was the President right or was he wrong? BRADBURY: . hold the President is always right, Senator. —exchange between a U.S. Senator and a Justice Department 1 lawyer ∗ University Professor and Professor of Law and Philosophy, Georgetown University. I owe thanks to John Partridge and Sebastian Kaplan-Sears for excellent research assistance; to Greg Reichberg, Bill Mengel, and Tim Sellers for clarifying several points of American, Roman, and military history; to Marty Lederman for innumerable helpful and critical conversations; and to Vicki Jackson, Paul Kahn, Larry Solum, and Amy Sepinwall for helpful comments on an earlier draft.
    [Show full text]
  • Establishing a Lebanese Senate: Bicameralism and the Third Republic
    CDDRL Number 125 August 2012 WORKING PAPERS Establishing a Lebanese Senate: Bicameralism and the Third Republic Elias I. Muhanna Brown University Center on Democracy, Development, and The Rule of Law Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies Additional working papers appear on CDDRL’s website: http://cddrl.stanford.edu. Working Paper of the Program on Arab Reform and Democracy at CDDRL. About the Program on Arab Reform and Democracy: The Program on Arab Reform and Democracy examines the different social and political dynamics within Arab countries and the evolution of their political systems, focusing on the prospects, conditions, and possible pathways for political reform in the region. This multidisciplinary program brings together both scholars and practitioners - from the policy making, civil society, NGO (non-government organization), media, and political communities - as well as other actors of diverse backgrounds from the Arab world, to consider how democratization and more responsive and accountable governance might be achieved, as a general challenge for the region and within specific Arab countries. The program aims to be a hub for intellectual capital about issues related to good governance and political reform in the Arab world and allowing diverse opinions and voices to be heard. It benefits from the rich input of the academic community at Stanford, from faculty to researchers to graduate students, as well as its partners in the Arab world and Europe. Visit our website: arabreform.stanford.edu Center on Democracy, Development, and The Rule of Law Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies Stanford University Encina Hall Stanford, CA 94305 Phone: 650-724-7197 Fax: 650-724-2996 http://cddrl.stanford.edu/ About the Center on Democracy, Development, and the Rule of Law (CDDRL) CDDRL was founded by a generous grant from the Bill and Flora Hewlett Foundation in October in 2002 as part of the Stanford Institute for International Studies at Stanford University.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Should the Governor General Be Canada's Head of State?
    Should the Governor General be Canada’s Head of State? CES Franks Remarks prepared for the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Study of Parliament Group Ottawa, 26 March 2010. Revised 30 March 2010 In a speech in Paris to UNESCO on 5 October 2009, Canada’s Governor General, Michaëlle Jean, said that: “I, a francophone from the Americas, born in Haiti, who carries in her the history of the slave trade and the emancipation of blacks, at once Québécoise and Canadian, and today before you, Canada's head of state, proudly represents the promises and possibilities of that ideal of society." This seemingly innocuous statement, which it might be thought would have made Canadians proud that their country could be so open, free, and ready to accept and respect able persons regardless of sex, colour, creed, or origins, instead became a matter of controversy and debate. The issue was Mme. Jean’s use of the term “head of state” to describe her position. Former Governor General Adrienne Clarkson had referred to herself as head of state without creating any controversy. Now it was controversial. Prime Minister Harper himself joined in the fray, as did the Monarchist League of Canada, both stating categorically that Queen Elizabeth II of England was Canada’s head of state, while the position of Governor General was as the Queen’s representative in Canada. At the time, the Governor General’s website included several statements such as: “As representative of the Crown and head of State, the Governor General carries out responsibilities with a view to promoting Canadian sovereignty and representing Canada abroad and at home." Within a few weeks these references had been deleted on the insistence of the government.
    [Show full text]
  • AP® Comparative Government and Politics Nigeria Briefing Paper
    AP® Comparative Government and Politics Nigeria Briefing Paper Paul J. Kaiser University of Pennsylvania Philadelphia, Pennsylvania connect to college success™ www.collegeboard.com The College Board: Connecting Students to College Success The College Board is a not-for-profit membership association whose mission is to connect students to college success and opportunity. Founded in 1900, the association is composed of more than 4,700 schools, colleges, universities, and other educational organizations. Each year, the College Board serves over three and a half million students and their parents, 23,000 high schools, and 3,500 colleges through major programs and services in college admissions, guidance, assessment, financial aid, enrollment, and teaching and learning. Among its best-known programs are the SAT®, the PSAT/NMSQT®, and the Advanced Placement Program® (AP®). The College Board is committed to the principles of excellence and equity, and that commitment is embodied in all of its programs, services, activities, and concerns. Permission to Reprint Statement The College Board intends this publication for noncommercial use by teachers for course and exam preparation; permission for any other use must be sought from the College Board. Teachers may reproduce this publication, in whole or in part, in limited print quantities for noncommercial, face-to-face teaching purposes and distribute up to 50 print copies from a teacher to a class of middle or high school students, with each student receiving no more than one copy. This permission does not apply to any third-party copyrights contained within this publication. When educators reproduce this publication for noncommercial, face-to-face teaching purposes, the following source line must be included: Nigeria Briefing Paper.
    [Show full text]
  • Legislature-Executive Relations in the Presidential System: a Study of Lagos and Ogun States, Nigeria, 1999-2011
    Legislature-Executive Relations in the Presidential System: A Study of Lagos and Ogun States, Nigeria, 1999-2011 By ONI, Samuel Olorunmaiye CUGP070188 A Thesis Submitted to the Department of Political Science and International Relations, School of Social Sciences, College of Development Studies, Covenant University, Ota, Nigeria in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Award of Ph.D Degree in Political Science May, 2013 i CERTIFICATION This is to certify that this study titled “Legislature-Executive Relations in the Presidential System: A Study of Lagos and Ogun States, Nigeria, 1999-2011” was carried out by Oni Samuel O. under our supervision and that the thesis has not been submitted for the award of any degree in this or any other university. Professor Remi Anifowose Department of Political Science Signature and Date University of Lagos (Supervisor) Professor Kayode Soremekun Department of Political Science Signature and Date & International Relations College of Development Studies Co-Supervisor ii DECLARATION It is hereby declared that this thesis titled “Legislature-Executive Relations in the Presidential System: A Study of Lagos and Ogun States, Nigeria, 1999-2011” was undertaken me, Oni Samuel O. The thesis is based on my original study in the Department of Political Science and International Relations, School of Social Sciences, College of Development Studies, Covenant University, Ota. The views of other researchers have been acknowledged. It is further restated that this work has not been submitted for the award of degree in this or any other institution. Oni Samuel O. Researcher Signature and Date The above declaration is attested to by: Professor Remi Anifowose Supervisor Signature and Date Professor Kayode Soremekun Co-Supervisor Signature and Date Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • Executive–Legislative Relations and the Transition to Democracy from Electoral Authoritarian Rule
    MWP 2016/01 Max Weber Programme The Peril of Parliamentarism? Executive–legislative Relations and the Transition to Democracy from Electoral Authoritarian Rule AuthorMasaaki Author Higashijima and Author and Yuko Author Kasuya European University Institute Max Weber Programme The Peril of Parliamentarism? Executive–legislative Relations and the Transition to Democracy from Electoral Authoritarian Rule Masaaki Higashijima and Yuko Kasuya EUI Working Paper MWP 2016/01 This text may be downloaded for personal research purposes only. Any additional reproduction for other purposes, whether in hard copy or electronically, requires the consent of the author(s), editor(s). If cited or quoted, reference should be made to the full name of the author(s), editor(s), the title, the working paper or other series, the year, and the publisher. ISSN 1830-7728 © Masaaki Higashijima and Yuko Kasuya, 2016 Printed in Italy European University Institute Badia Fiesolana I – 50014 San Domenico di Fiesole (FI) Italy www.eui.eu cadmus.eui.eu Abstract Why do some electoral authoritarian regimes survive for decades while others become democracies? This article explores the impact of constitutional structures on democratic transitions from electoral authoritarianism. We argue that under electoral authoritarian regimes, parliamentary systems permit dictators to survive longer than they do in presidential systems. This is because parliamentary systems incentivize autocrats and ruling elites to engage in power sharing and thus institutionalize party organizations, and indirectly allow electoral manipulation to achieve an overwhelming victory at the ballot box, through practices such as gerrymandering and malapportionment. We test our hypothesis using a combination of cross-national statistical analysis and comparative case studies of Malaysia and the Philippines.
    [Show full text]
  • Europe: Fact Sheet on Parliamentary and Presidential Elections
    Europe: Fact Sheet on Parliamentary and Presidential Elections July 30, 2021 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R46858 Europe: Fact Sheet on Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Contents Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1 European Elections in 2021 ............................................................................................................. 2 European Parliamentary and Presidential Elections ........................................................................ 3 Figures Figure 1. European Elections Scheduled for 2021 .......................................................................... 3 Tables Table 1. European Parliamentary and Presidential Elections .......................................................... 3 Contacts Author Information .......................................................................................................................... 6 Europe: Fact Sheet on Parliamentary and Presidential Elections Introduction This report provides a map of parliamentary and presidential elections that have been held or are scheduled to hold at the national level in Europe in 2021, and a table of recent and upcoming parliamentary and presidential elections at the national level in Europe. It includes dates for direct elections only, and excludes indirect elections.1 Europe is defined in this product as the fifty countries under the portfolio of the U.S. Department
    [Show full text]