Blog

Which form of government do you prefer for India?

(a) Coalition Govt, or (b) Single-party Govt, or   (c) Presidential form of Govt similar to the USA

The most significant contrast between the parliamentary and presidential forms of Government (as in the US) is that the executive branch is part of and answerable to the House of People in a parliamentary form of government. At the same time, the executive branch is independent and non-answerable to the US legislature.

1.  Coalition Govt. is preferred: -

• A coalition Government gives us a broader representation because like-minded parties come together to form a Government. If they have conflicting ideologies, a middle ground is sought that accommodates the interests of the vast majority. Major constitutional decisions are better discussed with input from representatives of coalition partners, and their consent gives them wider acceptance.

• Two different parties reflect a greater spectrum of the voting population. Issues that a single-party government would dismiss have greater weight when other parties are involved. Similarly, undemocratic or controversial legislation has a considerably lower chance of being passed.

• Even when a party has a majority at the centre, a coalition government should be formed (especially during wartime or economic crises) to confer the government with a high degree of perceived political legitimacy. For Ex, in the current NDA Govt at the centre, the BJP has a majority. Yet, it has coalition partners in the Govt to give itself broader legitimacy.

• Some may argue that coalition governments tend to be fractious and prone to disharmony. And their component parties hold differing beliefs, so they may not always agree on policy. Sometimes, the election results indeed make coalitions mathematically possible but ideologically infeasible. Yet, they can run for the entire tenure because the elected representatives do not wish to fight another election and are happy with a common minimum program.  For example, there was a coalition govt at the centre with just enough numbers for 15 years till 2014.

• The multi-party system in India allows many parties to flourish. As a result, sometimes, a single party fails to secure a distinct majority. Whenever they can form a coalition Govt and function, it is better than re-elections because re-elections are costly.

2. Single-party Govt is preferred: -

• In the 2019 Maharashtra State election, the three coalition partners (Shiv Sena, NCP & Congress) took more than a month to form a Govt because they had different ideologies. The delayed formation of government in the State kept governance in the back seat. After that, a new coalition formed a govt with a breakaway group of Shiv Sena. Had there been a provision for only a single party, such a scenario could have been avoided.

• In a democracy, a party gets votes based on its pre-election promises (manifesto). If the party comes into power, it must fulfil the promises made in the manifesto. In other words, the party in power must listen to the public to retain power next time. It allows the people to be more directly involved with the govt. On the other hand, in the US, two parties bicker over issues the public does not care about. In other words, efficiency and democracy are better maintained in single-party governance.

• There may be criticism that a single party is liable to display authoritarianism because exceptional powers like “ordinance” and “promulgation of emergency” are permitted by our constitution. These routes are indeed used by any Government to meet its desired objectives, even when they may not be a popular choice among citizens. However, the party in power knows they need another tenure at the end of their 5-year term, which keeps even single-party Govt in check.

•  An ideological compass is sometimes necessary for governments to navigate complex political & economic waters. On the other hand, coalitions need a more unifying philosophy. In addition, long-term planning often requires unpopular decisions in the short term. Coalitions often fail such tests because temporary unpopularity may encourage one of the parties involved to defect.

• Everyone will agree that exceptional circumstances, such as war, will be tackled more efficiently when a single party is in power. For example, the BJP Govt allowed the Indian Army to strike terrorist launch pads across LOC by a surgical strike. The Indian Air Force authorised an Airstrike on Balakot terrorist training camp. The BJP successfully called off the bogey of nuclear war with Pakistan.

• A single party can only be re-elected due to their work. A single-party Govt does not have to go through a strident opposition whose views may halt or delay the passage of essential bills. With a single party, any policy is implemented more quickly and efficiently.

3.  A Presidential form of Govt similar to the USA is preferred: -

• In a presidential system, the president is elected directly by the people. It makes the president's power more legitimate than that of the Prime Minister of India, who is appointed directly by the MPs. The Indian President is indirectly elected by the people (i.e., elected members of both houses of parliament, the elected members of the Vidhaan Sabha and the elected members of the legislative assemblies). He has only a ceremonial role in decision-making.

• A presidential system establishes the presidency and the legislature as two parallel structures. It allows each structure to monitor and check the other, preventing abuses of power.

• A president with strong powers can usually enact changes quickly, which is a boon when separation can also slow the system down. The same is not possible in other forms of Govt.

• By virtue of a fixed term, a president may provide more stability than a prime minister, who can be dismissed at any time by the party in power or by parties in the coalition. The criticism that a fixed term of 2-4 years will give rise to an authoritarian regime has been unfounded in US history.

• Some may argue that there is political gridlock whenever the president and the legislative majority are from different parties in the US. And it also reduces accountability by allowing the president and the legislature to shift blame to one another. In addition, Presidential systems often make it difficult to remove a president from office early, for example, after taking actions that become unpopular. However, such incidents have not been seen in US history.