Compare the Parliamentary and Presidential

forms of Government with reference to

India and the U.S.A.

INTRODUCTION:
There are basically two forms of democratic government systems – Presidential
and Parliamentary. India follows a parliamentary form of government modelled
on Britain’s. Our founding fathers had strong reasons for adopting this, as
opposed to the presidential system.
Apart from the parliamentary and presidential systems, there can also be a hybrid
system incorporating features of both systems. The chief difference between
these systems is the extent of power separation between the legislative, the
executive and the judiciary. Another major difference between the presidential
and parliamentary systems is the accountability of the executive to the
legislature.
First, we will discuss both forms of government systems enumerating their merits
and drawbacks, and then have a comparison of both the systems.

Presidential System of Government

In a presidential system, the head of the government leads an executive, that is
distinct from the legislature. Here, the head of the government and the head of
the state are one and the same. Also, a key feature is that the executive is not
responsible to the legislature.
Features of the Presidential System

1. The executive (president) can veto acts by the legislature.

2. The president has a fixed tenure and cannot be removed by a vote of no-
confidence in the legislature.
3. Generally, the president has the power to pardon or commute judicial
sentences awarded to criminals.
4. The president is elected directly by the people or by an electoral college.
Merits of Presidential System
The advantages of the presidential system are given below:

 Separation of powers: Efficiency of administration is greatly enhanced

since the three arms of the government are independent of each other.
 Expert government: Since the executive need not be legislators, the
President can choose experts in various fields to head relevant departments
or ministries. This will make sure that people who are capable and
knowledgeable form part of the government.
 Stability: This type of government is stable. Since the term of the president
is fixed and not subject to majority support in the legislative, he need not
worry about losing the government. There is no danger of a sudden fall of
the government. There is no political pressure on the president to make
decisions.
 Less influence of the party system: Political parties do not attempt to
dislodge the government since the tenure is fixed.

Demerits of Presidential System

The disadvantages of the presidential system are given below:

 Less responsible executive: Since the legislature has no hold over the
executive and the president, the head of the government can turn
authoritarian.
 Deadlocks between executive and legislature: Since there is a stricter
separation of powers here, there can be frequent tussles between both arms
of the government, especially of the legislature is not dominated by the
president’s political party. This can lead to an erosion in efficiency because
of wastage of time.
 Rigid government: Presidential systems are often accused of being rigid.
It lacks flexibility.
 Spoils system: The system gives the president sweeping powers of
patronage. Here, he can choose executives as per his will. This gives rise
to the spoils system where people close to the president (relatives, business
associates, etc.) get roles in the government.
Parliamentary System of Government
India chose a parliamentary form of government primarily because the
constitution-makers were greatly influenced by the system in England. Another
reason the founding fathers saw was that the parliamentary model would only
work to accommodate the varied and diverse groups within our population. Also,
the strict separation of powers in the presidential system would cause conflicts
between the two branches, the executive and the legislature, which our newly-
independent country could ill-afford.
There are more parliamentary forms of government in the world than there are
presidencies. In this system, the parliament is generally supreme and the
executive is responsible to the legislature. It is also known as the Cabinet form of
government, and also ‘Responsible Government’.
Features of the parliamentary system

1. Close relationship between the legislature and the executive: Here, the
Prime Minister along with the Council of Ministers form the executive and
the Parliament is the legislature. The PM and the ministers are elected from
the members of parliament, implying that the executive emerges out of the
legislature.
2. Executive responsible to the legislature: The executive is responsible to
the legislature. There is a collective responsibility, that is, each minister’s
responsibility is the responsibility of the whole Council.
3. Dual executive: There are two executives – the real executive and the
titular executive. The nominal executive is the head of state (president or
monarch) while the real executive is the Prime Minister, who is the head
of government.
4. Secrecy of procedure: A prerequisite of this form of government is that
cabinet proceedings are secret, and not meant to be divulged to the public.
5. Leadership of the Prime Minister: The leader of this form of government
is the Prime Minister. Generally, the leader of the party that wins a majority
in the lower house is appointed as the PM.
6. Bicameral Legislature: Most parliamentary democracies follow
bicameral legislature.
7. No fixed tenure: The term of the government depends on its majority
support in the lower house. If the government does not win a vote of no
confidence, the council of ministers has to resign. Elections will be held
and a new government is formed.

Although India follows this system chiefly influenced by the British model, there
are a few differences between the Indian and British systems. They are:
  In India, the PM can be from either the Rajya Sabha or the Lok Sabha. In
Britain, the PM will always be from the lower house, the House of
Commons.
 In Britain, the speaker once appointed, formally resigns from his/her
political party. In India, the speaker continues to be a member of his/her
party though he/she is expected to be impartial in the proceedings.
 The concept of a shadow cabinet is absent in India. In Britain, the
opposition forms a shadow cabinet that scrutinises the actions and policies
of the government. It also offers alternative programmes.

Merits of Parliamentary System

The advantages of the parliamentary system are as follows:

 Better coordination between the executive and the legislature: Since

the executive is a part of the legislature, and generally the majority of the
legislature support the government, it is easier to pass laws and implement
them.
 Prevents authoritarianism: Since the executive is responsible to the
legislature, and can vote it out in a motion of no confidence, there is no
authoritarianism. Also, unlike the presidential system, power is not
concentrated in one hand.
 Responsible government: The members of the legislature can ask
questions and discuss matters of public interest and put pressure on the
government. The parliament can check the activities of the executive.
 Representing diverse groups: In this system, the parliament offers
representation to diverse groups of the country. This is especially important
for a country like India.
 Flexibility: There is flexibility in the system as the PM can be changed
easily if needed. During the Second World War, the British PM Neville
Chamberlain was replaced by Winston Churchill. This is unlike the
presidential system where he/she can be replaced only after the entire term
or in case of impeachment/incapacity.

Demerits of Parliamentary System

The disadvantages of the parliamentary system are as follows:

 No separation of powers: Since there is no genuine separation of powers,

the legislature cannot always hold the executive responsible. This is
especially true if the government has a good majority in the house. Also,
because of anti-defection rules, legislators cannot exercise their free will
 and vote as per their understanding and opinions. They have to follow the
party whip.
 Unqualified legislators: The system creates legislators whose intention is
to enter the executive only. They are largely unqualified to legislate.
 Instability: Since the governments sustain only as long as they can prove
a majority in the house, there is instability if there is no single-largest party
after the elections. Coalition governments are generally quite unstable and
short-lived. Because of this, the executive has to focus on how to stay in
power rather than worry about the state of affairs/welfare of the people.
 Ministers: The executive should belong to the ruling party. This rules out
the hiring of industry experts for the job.
 Failure to take a prompt decision: Because there is no fixed tenure
enjoyed by the Council of Ministers, it often hesitates from taking bold and
long-term policy decisions.
 Party politics: Party politics is more evident in the parliamentary system
where partisan interests drive politicians more than national interests.
 Control by the bureaucracy: Civil servants exercise a lot of power. They
advise the ministers on various matters and are also not responsible to the
legislature.

Comparison of Presidential and Parliamentary Systems

Basis Parliamentary Presidential

Executive Dual Single

Accountability Executive accountable to Executive not accountable

legislature to legislature

Ministers Only from among MPs People outside the

legislature can be
appointed

Dissolution of PM can dissolve before the President cannot dissolve

lower house expiry of the term

Tenure Not fixed Fixed

 With Reference to India and U.S.A
The fundamental difference between Indian Government and U.S. Government
is that ours is a Parliamentary form of Government and U.S. Government is
Presidential form of Government.

Parliamentary form of Government means the Prime Minister shall be the

appointed head of the Government, whereas, in case of Presidential form of
Government, the President shall be the head of Government.

In India, almost all major powers are vested in the Prime Minister of India and
in U.S. the President is the most powerful authority.

Both Indian Parliament and US Congress are bicameral. Parliament consists of

the President, Upper House and Lower House.

The Executive in India is inseparably linked to the Legislature. The Executive

in India means the Council of Ministers. In U.S., the President himself is the
Executive and hence there is a clear distinction between the Executive and the
Legislature.

In U.S.A. the national Constitution allows its states to have their own
Constitutions. That is why the main Constitution of the nation is very smaller
one. But in India, one of the reasons, why the volume of our Constitution is so
large, is that it incorporates matters of all states.

Indian Constitution is both rigid and flexible in nature. Till 2013, there have
been total 120 amendments of the Constitution since 1949. U.S. Constitution is
comparatively rigid in nature and there have been only 27 amendments to it
since 1776.

The Fundamental Rights specified in Part III of the Indian Constitution is the
civil and political charter of India. Any law or Act passed by the legislature
must not mar any of the prescribed fundamental rights or violate the spirit of the
Constitution and in such case the Supreme Court for central level and High
Courts for state level shall declare such legislation void.

The Directive Principles specified in the Part IV of the Indian Constitution is

the social and economic charter of India and it is imperative the states shall
promote and abide by them towards building a welfare state.
In India number of representatives in the Council of States are decided in a
proportional basis, i.e., ratio between number of representatives from each state
and its population should be same for all. Whereas in the U.S.A., the number of
representatives in Senate is equal and always 2 for each state.

In the Constitution of India, a balance of power has been depicted among the
Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. Whereas, it is known that the
Judiciary of the U.S.A. is the most powerful.

In India, the President is regarded as the “Ornamental Head of the State” and
certain special powers are vested in him/her. He is elected by a special process
and not directly by the people. Whereas, the U.S. President is directly elected by
the people and it is said that the U.S. President is the most powerful all over the
world.
CONCLUSION
Finally, the structure of Indian Government is mainly federal but with
strong unitary bias. In case of U.S.A., the Government is mainly federal in
nature because the States are empowered with their own Constitutions.

PICTURES TO BE PASTED