India should go for the presidential form of democracy

Group Discussion
Points to remember before you participate in this discussion:
  • Assume you are one of the members of a real group discussion.
  • Take the initiative to participate and contribute your thoughts.
  • Contribute your positive thoughts towards providing the solution.
  • Post your thoughts here.
107 comments Page 1 of 11.

Isha Vyas said:   7 years ago
In my opinion, India should not jump on to presidential form because India has a wide number of population and to control so much population by only one person doesn't seem good and even may be because of this there would be many differences among people related to caste and religious system. And the most important thing is that now India has made up with parliamentary form and would definitely take a lot of time to get adjusted with presidential form.

Sai kiran said:   10 years ago
In my view, Parliamentary form of government is best for INDIA. Because, each and every citizen of INDIA has right to vote. But, we are misusing it by voting to persons who belong to our caste or religion and we are not thinking whether they are good candidates or criminals. So, instead of changing the form of government to presidential form, It's better to change our mind and every citizen should know his responsibilities and rights.

Shreya Kundu said:   6 years ago
I advocate for a presidential form of government for the following reasons:

1. President will be directly elected by the people of the country.

2. People can choose the presidents according to their integrity, leadership quality, honesty which is beyond doubt.

3. The total executive power will be visited or will be with the president, thus he can take decisions which is good for the country.

4. In the presidential form of Government majority or minority of the Parliament (Lok Sabha And Rajya Sabha) is not a factor, this can avoid midterm elections.

5. The financial power also will be with the president, thus can avoid delay of sanction of money for any good project of the country.

6. Even though our country is a Parliamentary form of Government of West Minister model (Britisher's model), but in the last general election in 2014, Narendra Modi fought the election in presidential form and he was projected as the supreme leader of BJP Nd was the star campaigner. Thus people of the country got the opportunity to choose their leader. As he was projected as the Prime Ministerial candidate for BJP.

By this. I conclude that.

" India Should Have A Presidential Form Of Government ! ".

Rohit kumar said:   7 years ago
Hello everyone,

I appreciate your effort and respect your views on this topic but my point of view is that.

As we know India is a large country and 2nd in population. We are also having diversity in culture, religion, custom, tradition and there is unity in diversity due to our policies and laws.

I feel India shouldn't go for the presidential form of democracy due to various reasons.

1. We are diverse country so it's important to have everyone opinion in every decision making so that it won't hurt anyone sentiment.

2. Our democracy is 65 years old almost which is a root and respect of our country too so we shouldn't violate that.

3. In parliamentary form of democracy, there's an opposition party who always raise the issue taken by ruling party which isn't perfect for country and after discussion a right decision is taken place.

So, in conclusion, I would like to say that yes in the presidential form of democracy efficiency in quick decision, eradication of corruption etc increases but it's not suitable for a large country with so much diversity.

Debayan said:   9 years ago
I don't think an overpopulated country like India should not go for presidential government because:

1) Countries like the United States which has the presidential form of government have adequate resources and the correct personnel in the correct places for one man to rule the entire country but in a backward country like India which has a pot-pouri of uncoordinated services it is not possible to bring into existence and sustain the presidential form of government.

2) Having MP's and MLA's help in better management particularly in times of crisis and riots.

3) It is not possible for one man to know the demands and necessities of the entire country nor visit everywhere in person.

So to conclude I will say that a politically unstable country like India should not imply the presidential form of government.

Mohit Soni said:   9 years ago
Hello friends.

I think parliamentary system is good for our country, because all powers in a single hand may give rise to misuse of powers. People at their level elect their representative like at village level - sarpanch and in cities - MLA, these representative hear the problems of people and provide solution to them. A single person can't hear problems of population of 125 million people. Team work make democracy more better.

Sapna said:   9 years ago
I think India should not go for presidential democracy. Though the president is elected by direct vote of public, we can't put our whole country's faith on one leader. If he fails to work for people then there will be no other person on whom we will hope to take system in hand immediately.

As we see current parliamentary system is also not working properly for us, because system is switching between only two political parties. They are getting chance one after another but not doing anything for our nation.

Hence solution is to bring such a party that will show these traditional parties there mistakes.

Varun Parkar said:   7 years ago
India has to have a presidential campaign because.

India is a vast country. We have a lot of states like Karnataka, Maharashtra and much more.

There may be a lot of parties to elect them and there is a fight amongst them to get votes.

And then, on the other hand, there is a presidential election where the people will get to decide.

And the power lies in his hand so that he or she can control the amount of black money.

That is why would like to conclude my speech that.


Siya said:   9 years ago
I think India should go with parliamentary form of government. India with presidential form of government looks like as a school with principal and students only and not having teachers. As the principal can't teach the whole school alone in the same way a single person can't handle a country with such a big population. In our history, we have followed this type of government. Then why that form of government had been changed? Because presidential form of government doesn't work in our country.

HEMENDRA SINGH BHATI said:   9 years ago
After reading all the above mentioned comments I found that majority of my friends go with presidential form of democracy. See, friends India has the biggest constitution in the world. And there is sharp view for every laws that had been crafted. There are also provisions for adding or updating sections according to demand of time.

This is the high time to make some major changes but not in the form of 'presidential form of democracy' but implementing available resources in the best way. "Presidential form of democracy" is the worst solution our country can have. Decision of one man is not worth for a country with worlds biggest population.

The actual root of corruption is avoiding it in our daily life or participating with full effort. Somehow we have grown with a tendency to do our needful by bribing. Second point is most of the citizens ignore the whole election process even at very ground level. We don't try to know about background of the candidates like their education etc.

We should have right to boycott election if majority of us found that parties involved are not good.

Post your thoughts here:

Your comments will be displayed after verification.