Churchill had once remarked indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all other systems of government that have been tried from time to time. Even today debate continues as to which form of government is the best. There are many who favour presidential form and aver that the parliamentary democracy doesn’t suit the genius of our people. There are too many ifs and buts in it. There are people who are votaries of a totalatarian type of government like the one being practised in China or was adopted by Stalin, Castro or Mao but this view is rebutted by its detractors saying that no doubt leaders like Mao and Castro were people-friendly but what if a cruel and corrupt person comes to power under such a system and start misusing the immense powers available to him under it? This apprehension is quite justified and that is the precise reason why the political analysts favour strengthening of political and state institutions rather than building personality cults which in the long run doesn’t prove beneficial to the man in the street.
The apologists of centralised system of government headed by the president are of the view that only a leader who is not hamstrung by the rigmarole of long parliamentary procedures and check and balances can deliver goods to the common man in the minimum possible time whereas on the contrary prime minister’s hands are tied by so many factors and , therefore, he cannot deliver as expeditiously as the leadership under the presidential form of government can deliver.
In short the debate on this issues goes on unabated. Both schools of opinion have weighty points supporting their viewpoint. The debate must go on till the proponents of various viewpoints reach at a conclusion based on consensus.
- Latest
- Trending
