Parliamentary Executive For A New Democracy

6 Pages 1504 Words

Between the two popular executives of either a presidential or a parliamentary
executive for a new democracy, I would select a parliamentary system. It is
important to distinguish between the two executives of the presidential or the parliamentary system before outweighing the costs and the benefits and determine its suitability for the new democracy by examining some examples in the prototypes of each system. The basis for a new democracy lies within the stability of the government. While it may be difficult for a new democracy to achieve that stability overnight, it proves that such stability will be achieved in the long run and provide efficiency for the running government. My choice of selecting a parliamentary system can be justified due to the ability of pushing agendas more quickly, which is needed for the implementation of new policies that the nation has based its electoral votes upon. Another fundamental principle I base my argument upon is the risk associated with concentrating the power in one person, which leads to the ‘winner-take-all’ syndrome (Mainwaring and Shugart,1997) leading to one focus and therefore it is needed to force moderation upon debates. The reason for the transition of many countries to democracies is because of the faults in their previous system, usually that of authoritative regimes, and selecting a parliamentary system in that regards eliminates the fear of the public of the risk for picking the wrong candidate in elections due to the ability to overthrow the government with votes of no confidence. Therefore, I believe selecting a parliamentary system is in the best interest for a new democracy.

The main difference between a presidential executive and a parliamentary executive is its legislative and executive branches. With a presidential system, it features a separation of powers in the independence of the executive and the legislature while a parliamentary system have the same members of ...