COMPARATIVE STUDY OF PARLIAMENTARY AND PRESIDENTIAL SYSTEMS

Abstract

The debate between parliamentary and presidential systems of governance has been a significant topic in political science, especially in diverse democracies like India. This study provides a comparative analysis of both systems, evaluating their effectiveness, stability, and suitability in the Indian context. The parliamentary system, as adopted by India, emphasizes collective responsibility, flexibility, and a fusion of powers, while the presidential system offers a clear separation of powers and fixed executive terms. The paper examines key aspects such as executive-legislative relations, accountability, policy continuity, and crisis management. Additionally, it explores historical and contemporary arguments for and against switching to a presidential system in India, considering factors like coalition politics, federalism, and administrative efficiency. The findings suggest that while the presidential system may offer stability and decisive leadership, India's parliamentary system aligns better with its socio-political diversity and ensures greater accountability. The study concludes with recommendations for potential reforms within the existing framework to enhance governance without drastic structural changes.