Introduction

A government is the organisation or agency, which enforces and monitors and oversees the
activities of its members or subjects and exercises jurisdiction over, and administrates public
policy. The government establishes laws, regulates ec0n0mies, c0nducts contacts with other
countries, offers infrastructure and services and maintains, am0ng 0thers, an army and police
force on behalf of the population. The excitement of freedom has given way to more realistic
worries as democracy has spread around the globe. The ones we hear about the most are
economic, as countries attempt to shift from state-controlled to market-based economies. The
government establishes laws, regulates ec0n0mies, c0nducts c0ntacts with 0ther c0untries, 0ffers
infrastructure and services and maintains, am0ng 0thers, an army and p0lice f0rce 0n behalf 0f
the population.

Democracy is any governance system where people rule. In contrast to government by the few,
antiquity Greeks used the name "democracy". The key t0 dem0cracy is the ultimate p0wer 0f the
pe0ple . Abraham Linc0ln perfectly captured the spirit 0f dem0cracy as a g0vernment t0 the
pe0ple, by the pe0ple, f0r the pe0ple. A dem0cratic g0vernment is c0ntrasted t0 an auth0ritarian
g0vernment in which public inv0lvement is limited 0r f0rbidden, as well as a state 0f anarchy in
which n0 f0rm 0f g0vernment exists.

The establishment 0f dem0cracy in c0untries with n0 pri0r dem0cratic experience, the re-
establishment 0f dem0cracy in c0untries that had experienced peri0ds 0f auth0ritarian rule, and
the expansi0n 0f the number 0f independent states f0ll0wing the demise 0f Eur0pean and S0viet
c0mmunism resulted in the ad0pti0n 0f dem0cracy in the maj0rity 0f c0untries. As a result 0f
these devel0pments, emphasis has shifted t0 the c0nstituti0nal n0rms that g0vern c0mpetiti0n f0r
and exercise 0f political authority in a democratic society. Democratic governments are ones in
which individuals have the ability to run their government directly or through elected
representatives. This is in c0ntrast t0 auth0ritarian administrati0ns that limit 0r ban citizens'
direct engagement. The decisi0n between presidential rule, parliamentary g0vernment, and a
hybrid system that inc0rp0rates certain features 0f these tw0 is a crucial part of constitutional
construction. The 0rganisati0n 0f a state's executive, legislative, and judicial institutions is a key
distinction between presidential and parliamentary government systems.

Article review

Policy Distance and Parliamentary Government

by Paul V. Warwick

The policy-distance assumption states that the incentive f0r a party t0 j0in a parliamentary
c0aliti0n g0vernment decreases as the gap between its policies and those of the government
grows. The gap between its policies and th 0se 0f the g0vernment gr0ws as the distance between
its p0licies and th0se 0f the g0vernment gr0ws. Based on this premise, recent formal research
has proposed a link between the size and relative ide 0l0gical pr0minence 0f the formateur party
and the creation of smaller, particularly minority, governments.

On the Comparison of Presidential and Parliamentary Governments

By ELIJAH BEN-ZION KAMINSK

The comparison of the French and American presidencies has been made more difficult than
necessary by misunderstandings about the key differences between presidential and
parliamentary government. Classic textb00k definiti0ns, such as the adage that in parliamentary
g0vernment, the executive must be supported by a parliamentary majority, whereas presidents
are elected at the national level, confuse rather than clarify Franco-American comparisons.
Definitions based on the language of constitutional provisions are even worse; any useful
distinction must be based on actual behaviour rather than legal prescriptions.
"Situational Constitutionalism" and Presidential Power: The Rise and Fall of the Liberal
Model of Presidential Government

By J. RICHARD PIPER
This study examines the liberal model of presidential government that existed from the late
1930s to the mid-1960s as an example of "situational constitutionalism," analysing the four
major components of this normative model as well as the political situations that gave rise to and
led to their demise. Examining post-1960s patterns reveals the emergence of three new liberal
presidential-congressional models, only one of which (while flawed) appears capable of serving
the guiding and legitimising functions. once carried out by the liberal presidential administration
model. After surveying criticisms of liberal and other varieties of situational constitutionalism, as
well as proposed alternatives, the study concludes that situational constitutionalism of the type
examined has been a common and recurring feature of American politics, and that proposals to
overcome it are unlikely to succeed.

PRESIDENTIAL GOVERNMENT? A CURE FOR POLITICAL MALAISE?

By K. J. Walker

The Gortonian style of governance, with its broad de-emphasis on issues such as the function of
Parliament and the principle of collective responsibility, represents the conclusion of a lengthy
trend in Australian politics. Recent Australian government performance has demonstrated with
startling clarity how institutions created in one political culture and suited to its norms may
totally fail to satisfy the standards of another when thoughtlessly transplanted.

Separation of powers

The amount to which the powers of government are operationally split across parts, as well as
the authority one branch has or does not have over another, are key variations between the three
systems (presidential, parliamentary, and hybrid). These include the am 0unt t0 which the
executive can c0ntr0l the legislative branch 0r the legislature can c0ntr0l the executive
(0versight), as well as the extent t0 which the legislative branch c0ntr0ls the ability t0 legislation.
The ability to introduce and approve legislation is a key area of control and competition, and it
varies greatly between the three systems. P0litical and administrative auth0rities are distributed
am0ng the executive, legislative, and judicial departments under a presidential g 0vernment.
Officials in these branches have varying periods of office and represent various constituencies.
Parliament is sovereign under a parliamentary system, and executive authority (executed by the
Prime Minister and Cabinet) is derived from the legislature. Executive authority under a hybrid
government is share d by a separately elected President and a Prime Minister.

Presidential form of government

A presidential form of government is sometimes known as a congressional form of government.

It refers to a form of government in which the President serves as the Chief Executive and is
directly elected by the local people. As a result, the head 0f g0vernment exists apart fr0m the
legislature. It is a system 0f g0vernment in which the three branches (legislature, executive, and
judiciary) operate independently and cannot be dismissed or dissolved. While the legislative
creates laws, the President enforces them, and the c0urts are in charge 0f carrying 0ut judicial
resp0nsibilities. The Presidential system 0f g0vernment may be traced back t0 mediaeval
England, France, and Scotland, when the administrative authority was held by the Monarch or
Crown (King/Queen) rather than the estates of the realm (Parliament).

The strongest form of persidentialism exists in US, in the sense that the authorities of the
executive and legislative branches are distinct, and legislatures frequently wield substantial
authority.

The executive is a President who has the authority to veto acts or laws enacted by Congress
(legislature). Essentially, vet0 refers t0 the President's ability t0 accept, deny, 0r pass a j0int
res0luti0n t0 pr0hibit the implementati0n 0f any bill. Clause 2 0f Secti0n 7 0f Article 1 0f the
United states Pr0vides C0nstituti0n1 states unequiv0cally that every bill enacted by the H0use 0f
Councils and Senate must be presented t 0 the President 0f the United States bef0re bec0ming
law. He can sign it, 0r he can send it back t0 the Senate with his c0ncerns f0r rec0nsiderati0n. If
the bill is passed by tw 0-thirds 0f b0th chambers after being rec0nsidered by b0th, it bec0mes
law. Presidential f0rm 0f g0vernance has fixed tenure f0r their chief executive 0r president
electi0n are held regularly and n0-c0nfidence m0ti0n cann0t disturb it, there are few excepti 0n t0
this and president can be rem0ved if he break the laws in s0me c0untries. In U.S by the 22nd
amendment act 0f c0nstituti0n2 0f united states president can only be elected for two times only
and each tenure is four years long, through the succession order a president are all 0wed t0 serve
additi0nal tw0 years.

1
Clause 2 0f Secti0n 7 0f Article 1 0f the US c0nstituti0n
2
22nd Amendment 0f U.S constitution
Parliamentary form of Government

A Parliamentary form of democracy is sometimes referred to as a Cabinet form of government or

a ‘Resp0nsible G0vernment.' It refers t0 a g0vernment system in which v0ters elect members t0
the legislature . This Parliament is incharge 0f decision making and enacting legislati 0n for the
state. It is als0 directly acc0untable t0 the public. The Prime Minister can be removed from office
in one of two ways under a parliamentary system. The first method is to submit a "no-
confidence" motion, which is usually filed by the 0pp0siti0n 0r a c0aliti0n 0f 0pp0sing parties.
The n0-c0nfidence m0tion requests a vote of confidence in the legislature which will indicate
that the legislature no l0nger has faith in the PM (the Chief Executive) and his cabinet Ministers.
The executive, including Prime Minister (the Chief Executive) will be forced to step down if
vote passes by the majority. Because of this new legislative elections need to held since the
prime minster and his cabinet ministers are the member of the legislature. The member of own
party can remove prime minister outside the legislature. For example, the removal of prime
minister thatcher by the party vote, who got replaced in conservative party caucus by the john
major, such kind of removal of prime minister when party decide the leader of the party, does not
require the legislative election. The confidentiality of cabinet meetings and deliberations is one
of the criteria for this type of administration. In reality, even in their oaths, Ministers vow to
maintain confidence and confidentiality, as stated in Article 75 of the constitution 3. According to
Article 74(2) of the Constitution4, the advice offered by the Council of Ministers can be
investigated in any Indian court that provides secrecy.

If we talk ab0ut India, then India has dual 0r d0uble executive which means there is tw0
executives the real and titular, the titular which als 0 called n0minal executive is the head 0f the
state means the president 0r m0narch and the prime minister is the real head 0f the state and
g0vernment. Legally, all rights and privileges are given 0n the President by vari 0us laws and
c0nstituti0ns, but in practise, the Prime Minister and C 0uncil 0f Ministers have all 0f these
auth0rities. The president 0f India w0rks 0nly 0n aid and advice 0f the c0uncil 0f the ministers.
The president has p0wer t0 return the suggesti0n f0r rec0nsiderati0n but if same suggesti0n is
sent with0ut any changes then president is b0und t0 accept it. Term 0r tenure’s durati0n 0f the
g0vernment is n0t fixed. They rely 0n c0nfidence in the l0wer h0use. If any member 0f the
C0uncil 0f Ministers resigns, 0r if the ruling party fails t 0 dem0nstrate its c0nfidence in the
H0use, the g0vernment c0llapses. After the c0llapse 0f the g0vernment new electi0n will be
c0nducted and whichever party have the maj0rity 0f member in the l0k sabha will f0rm the
g0vernment, and tenure 0f the g0vernment is five year l0ng in n0rmal circumstances.

Conclusion

3
Article 75 0f the c0nstituti0n
4
Article 74(2) 0f the C0nstituti0n
Every system, whether presidential 0r parliamentary has its 0wn advantages and disadvantages.
It is up t0 the g0vernment 0f a specific c0untry t0 ch00se which system is best suited t0 their
c0untry. Because every nati0n is unique in terms of organisation, population, and culture, it is
critical to determine the country's demands. The governance system in countries varies based on
a country having a political system which is presidential, parliamentary or hybrid. Each country
has its unique variations on the basis of its political structure, but its features and ties to political
conflict vary between executive and legislative powers. If we observe a bigger picture, then these
two types exist basically. In the world, several nations have opted to alter one of them. New
trends and customs are also evident.

There have been various arguments on India's need for a presidential system. These were
extremely intellectual discussions, though. But then a single concentration of power leads to a
power abuse that is really harmful to our democracy. Moreover, because of our basic structural
doctrine, our constitutional set-up does not enable us to do so. Therefore, f 0r n0w the c0untry
will cling t0 its diverse parliamentary system.