Presidential v/s Parliamentary Form of Government in India

I strongly recommend presidential form of government. As we can see many drawbacks in parliamentary form of government.

Firstly,

We don't get quality leaders to govern our country. We can experience that if any candidate who's opting for any job specially any government job then it is clearly mentioned in the application form that there should not be any criminal charges against him, but everyone know's there are many politician's who have criminal charges against them and despite of that they are continuing there terms as ministers.

My point is that when we need no criminal charges against us for getting a any government job. Then why we are careless for them who are going to govern us for complete 5 years.

Secondly,

You all might me knowing that nowadays every newspaper's headlines with some or the other minister's fake qualification degree cases.

Finally,

There are country's in world where they are governed by president and are most successful in achieving there goals.

Parliamentary form and presidential form both are successfully working. The two forms of government have their own distinctive characteristics & their respective merits and demerits.

In recent times it has been felt that the presidential form is more workable & urgently needed. Here I want to share some points suggesting that presidential form is better than parliamentary form,

1. In the parliamentary system, the pm and the chief ministers are totally dependent upon their respective legislatures in the matter of selection of the ministers. On one hand they are expected to select men of vision. Integrity, ability, professional knowledge and most important-practical experience. Whereas under the presidential system, the president is not hampered by such considerations. He is not tied to or subordinate to the legislature. He is free to choose his cabinet of ministers from outside the members of the legislature.

2. The elected leader of the majority party becomes the PM & then forms the government. Whereas, in presidential form of government, the president is the real head of the executive and is elected directly.

Thus, at the end of the debate, I would like to conclude that presidential for of government is better than the parliamentary form in many aspects which were not possible to mention. Presidential system means- greater stability & sanity in the politics of a country, without any doubt.

I feel parliamentary form of government is better as though it takes lots of time to decide on a single issue but if for the right decisions little time is invested then it is totally worthy of it where it is not so in presidential system.

India is better with parliament form of government because India have seen many corrupt politician therefore India will not be able to survive if we see a corrupt president in presidential form of government.

If a government is not working properly in parliament then the government is dissolved and a new government is formed but is a president is not able to fulfill his duties as president then it will become very difficult for the county to survive as India is very familiar with corruption and crime.

I support the government led by president of India. Because in the parliament led by a governments makes decisions slowly and steadily, it makes waste of a time while making the decisions and it difficult go get single party in the power.

Some times the government makes with the number of parties which leads to misuse of power. i.e. if the prime minister wants take any decision, the co alliance parties don't like either the prime minister take back of collapse the government so he need to be convince everybody in house of parliament.

So president rule of form is the best to rule India. When it do India will grow like a tree.

According to me presidential form of government is best because it avoids the misusing of powers and a country can be run in a better way.

According to me presidential form of government is better than parliamentary form of government. If, we notice America, they are following presidential form of government. Here president has the supreme power (power is centralized) rather than parliament form of government (power is distributed).

More the distribution of power more is the misuse of power. What actually is happening in India. Today why there is day to day increase in corruption occurring in India. If we see today ministers they make good promises before election but after they win election where are the promises. That is why parliamentary or democratic form of government is the worst form of government.

According to my point of view, presidential form of India is best because no one can misuse their powers. But only thing is we have to choose best one. Everything is happened by human so they should have to be alert when they are choosing person.

Hello every one. My name is Hani Chaudhary.

I will suggest parliamentary form of government is because of following reason:

1. It lowers the work force.

2. More people will be accounted for any cause of action.

3. Parliamentary system distribute the power because bureaucrat headed by the president and legislature system is headed by prime minister of India.

And I will suggest presidential system because of following reason:

1. Presidential system allows fast action on any any issue, so it is less time consuming in compare with parliamentary system.

Thank you every one.

For me the person working is more important it hardly matter that he/she is working in a parliamentary or presidential form of government the thing which is important is that he/she is working for the betterment of country or not. Therefore the system is not at all important.