Form Commission To Consider Presidential System: Shanta

By: May 6th, 2017 12:29 am

news(L to R) Prabhat Kumar of Prabhat Prakashan, Congress MP and former Union minister Shashi Tharoor, MP and BJP Margdarshak Mandal’s member Shanta Kumar, constitution expert Dr. Subhash Kashyap and writer Bhanu Dhamija at the book launch in New Delhi.

Susheel Rajesh/ New Delhi

The discussion over presidential form of government and parliamentary form is not new. Prior to the independence, after independence, even till the adoption of the constitution, the efficacy of the parliamentary form of government has seen a sharp debate. Many in the constituent assembly had also voiced their reservations regarding the suitability of the parliamentary form in a vast and diverse country like India. The debate continues till date but never has any Indian or foreign scholar analysed the issue citing so many instances and forceful arguments as Bhanu Dhamija did in his book ‘Why India Needs the Presidential System’, published in 2015. The author thought it fit to supplement his efforts by reaching out to a larger audience by means of its Hindi version. Hence, the book titled “Bharat Main Rashtrapati Pranali: Kitni Jaroori, Kitni Behtar”.

‘Parliamentary System Is Root Cause Of Political Problems’

A strong votary of presidential system, Congress MP Shashi Tharoor said, “ In our system, MPs can not exercise legislative powers but they contest elections to obtain executive powers. We have formed such governments that have given credence to politics over policies. The system promotes personal interests of leaders rather than furthering their well thought programmes and policies.”

“The governments had been focusing less on the governance but more on forming common minimum programmes of the alliance to remain in power during past 25 years prior to 2014,” he asserted., “Time has come for a change but political leaders don’t want it as they know how to use the present system,” added Tharoor.

He said many parties are also unclear about their policies as main focus is to sit in the government. “In present system, places are given to the electable and not to the able in the Cabinet. The system allows give and shifting of loyalties  besides hampering law forming process.”  Stressing that arguments were never so clear as they are now for switching over to the presidential system, Shashi Tharoor said, “In a sense we can say that our parliamentary system is being run as presidential form as all decisions are taken by one person in one office. Parliamentary system is the root cause of many political problems, he said, adding that people want accountability from one person but don’t want a domineering regime. “ Presidentail system is urgently required as the country is heading towards the rule of one party and one person,” opined Shashi Tharoor Senior BJP leader and MP Shanta Kumar said the system adopted 67 years ago has not only failed but also put the country in trouble. “It should change as politicians have vested interest in it. Democracy has not remained democracy in India but has turned into an election system as country faces elections every year,” he pointed out, adding, “Something is wrong somewhere and a commission should be constituted to review the system that has led to corruption, instability and other problems. Elections should be held once in five years as these generate black money. ”

Noted constitution expert Subhash Kashyap said neither Briton’s electoral system nor parliamentary system can run in a country that has 2000 political parties. None of the 12 essential characteristics of Briton’s parliamentary system is applicable in India, he added. Kashyap said,“We have a hybrid system which is neither parliamentary nor presidential. We must be clear as to which presidential system we want in India as many countries have similar systems in place.” Advocating reforms in election process and party system, he asserted that as there is no law for political parties. All political parties, ruling and opposition, are against reforms in the system, he added, pointing that in present election process a person having 15% vote bank in a constituency has 90% chances of winning due to presence of large number of political parties.

Places are given to the electable and not to the able ones in the Cabinet as the system allows give and take

-Shashi Tharoor, Congress MP

A commission should be constituted to review the system that has led to corruption, instability and other problems

-Shanta Kumar, BJP MP

We have a hybrid system which is neither parliamentary nor presidential

-Dr. Subhash Kashyap, Constitution Expert

Author’s Viewpoint

newsDharamshala-based Bhanu Dhamija is of the considered view that government shapes a society’s character. It impacts the society’s outlook and action in so many ways. It is therefore imperative that the nation’s political system foster a national vision, ensure fairness and encourage participation. India has been weighed down by corruption which is a direct result of misuse of absolute or unbridled power vested in a few without any checks and balances.

But Bhanu Dhamija argues that power corrupts only when the system allows it. The founders of the American system were wiser – to deal with power’s tendency to corrupt, the various powers were separated while creating the architecture of the government. “Voting was done eight times in constitutional assembly whether President should be elected by Legislature or directly by people. Ultimately it emerged that control by Legislature would be a dangerous system,” he adds.

“In India, provincial constitution committee led by Patel proposed that governor should be elected directly by people whereas Nehru’s union constitution committee said President should be indirectly elected by MPs. A joint meeting was called that passed a resolution that Nehru ji should review and President should directly be elected by people. That review never happened, he pointed out.

Bhanu Dhamija said Presidential system doesn’t allow anybody’s dominance, good leaders emerge, it curbs corruption, helps in formulating grass root agenda, and has no place for caste and religion based politics There are many reasons why presidential system could not be implemented in the country even as British had suggested that pure parliamentary system was not suitable for India. The country is again repeating the same mistake now even as many people advocate adoption of presidential form of the government. Ambedkar ji had stated in Rajya Sabha in 1953 that parliamentary system is not good for anyone. Rajiv Pratap Rudy also brought a resolution in Rajya Sabha 2012 regarding adoption of some of the features of presidential system. Vajpayee ji had said in 1998 that we should look at the benefits of presidential form.

Presidential system doesn’t allow anybody’s dominance, good leaders emerge, it curbs corruption, helps in formulating grass root agenda, and has no place for caste and religion based politics.

-Bhanu Dhamija

Author of ‘Why India Needs the Presidential System’ & ‘Bharat Main Rashtrapati Pranali: Kitni Jaroori, Kitni Behtar’

Follow the writer on twitter @ BhanuDhamija

विवाह प्रस्ताव की तलाश कर रहे हैं? निःशुल्क रजिस्टर करें !


Keep watching our YouTube Channel ‘Divya Himachal TV’. Also,  Download our Android App