Presidential v/s Parliamentary Form of Government in India

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.
98 comments Page 1 of 10.

Arsh tiwari said:   6 years ago
I agree parliamentary because the reason for this is that, unlike the presidential system parliamentary system have a built -in the mechanism that allows for the easy removal of a lousy leader, who can be removed by easily in three legal ways (1) vote of confidence. (2) removal by the party. (3) removal by the hand of the state.

Shubh said:   6 years ago
First of all, I want to say that India is huge population one man can't do all thing if we want development of every region so there should be a representative of that area so in my point of view Parliament is the best way to represent the actual condition of the different area.

Gargee said:   6 years ago
I support parliamentary form of government because people and the the members of parliament itself can keep a check on the government and each other and full power is not vested in one man's hand as it is harmful and can cause dictatorship.

Nishith.n said:   7 years ago
Presidential form of government is better. There are many corrupted politicians who eats all the money and does nothing for people. If there is a direct control by president then there would be no corruption. This type of government can help to improve country economically and politically.

Ankit Kapoor said:   7 years ago
I think parliamentary form of government is better.

Nishtha said:   7 years ago
I think presidential form of government is better because it fastens up the decision and execution process which ultimately reduces corruption, problems that people face and also ultimately the growth rate.

Rita said:   7 years ago
I think the presidential form of democracy is the worst way of ruling.

Why should a single person be given all the rights its like practicing inequality within a country?

I even think so that there's no use of saying democratic if a country has this form of democracy.

Abhishek said:   7 years ago
Cultural plurality is the root cause of discrimination in Indian society, due to which many states wants to be an Independent Nation to maintain the integrity of the country only parliamentary form of government is not suitable. Huge diversity in caste, sex, religion demands to increase power or independent executive but at the same time corruption which is an ace problem in India democracy make us put power over executive ie Legislative. At this time we need a quick decision-making government having the lifespan of fixed 5 years but due to the fact of Regionalism to keep a check or to make them participate in decision making. Hence in India having a vast culture the real need of successful democracy is strong judiciary and having strong laws applicable on every citizen of India.

Ritesh said:   7 years ago
In my opinion, both parliamentary and presidential systems have their own merits and demerits. If we look in the parliamentary system then the best thing is that no one is the boss of the whole system and the decisions are always taken by the group of representatives. So, this is the merit of the parliament system but in the presidential system, all the power is in the hand of the president and he is solely responsible for taking all the decisions and he can take the decisions without any permission or majority and this might lead to dictatorship. Now, you may give the example that America has the presidential form of the government and they are success but I would like to mention a very important point and that is.America is success not because of their government, I think they are success because of their judicial system; they are success because of their law and order system. And history says that presidential forms of democracies have been misused and transformed to dictatorship. For ex: Egypt, Afghanistan, Syria, Russia and many countries. But In a parliamentary form, it is absolutely difficult to transform, though. So, I would like to conclude with this that if we can remove corruption, enforce law and order strictly and hold the government and its officials accountable then parliament form is the best a form of the government.

Harsh said:   7 years ago
I think that parliamentary form of government is better as prevents the prime minister from becoming a dictator. President should always pass the bills according to his opinion along with other people's thought.

Post your thoughts here:

Your comments will be displayed after verification.