Which System of Government is best for Pakistan?

Which form of a system of government suits Pakistan: A presidential system or a parliamentary system? The debate on forms of government in Pakistan is an old one. In this context, we have seen the presidential system as well as the parliamentary system in Pakistan. Historical data also suggests that at one point in time, Pakistan also adopted a hybrid system having characteristics of both these systems.

What is the Parliamentary system of government?

The Parliamentary system of government has its origin in Great Britain. Great Britain’s system of governance is also considered a standard for the parliamentary system. Any characteristics of the parliamentary system have their source in Britain.

But theoretically speaking, in a parliamentary system, the parliament is the ultimate source of power in political affairs. In other words, the parliament is the fountain of all powers. The rest of the institutions, especially the executive, work as subordinates to and under the authority of the parliament.

Thus, there is parliamentary oversight of every state affairs. One key feature of this system is that the Chief Executive, whom we call the Prime Minister, along with his cabinet are the members of parliament. Parliament itself elects them, and parliament has the power to dismiss them through a vote of no confidence.

How Presidential system is different from the parliamentary system of Government?

On the other hand, in the Presidential system, no government institution has complete control of the overall system. The president heads the executive branch, and the executive is a separate distinctive branch of the government, equal to the legislature.

Thus, parliament does the legislation and the executive enforces the decisions of the parliament. Hence, there is no need for both these institutions to be closely linked constitutionally, however, there can be coordination in political terms.

Thus, we can say that in a presidential system, there is a separation of powers between the executive and the legislative authority. Both these institutions work separately. Hence, the powers of the state are equally divided in the presidential system, whereas in the parliamentary system it relies on the parliament. This is the most basic difference between the parliamentary and presidential forms of systems.The presidential system of government has its roots and origin in the birth of the United States of America, where for the first time the constitutional presidential system was adopted in 1788.

There is a general misconception that in the presidential system, all the powers relies with the President. This is not the case, President has the powers but only in the domain of the executive. In the domain of legislation, the President has no power and the ultimate powers reside with the legislature.

So which system of government is better for Pakistan?

Those people who support the Presidential system argue that Pakistan for most of its history Pakistan has remained a parliamentary democracy. During this time period, the parliamentary system has not delivered stability and failed to ensure the political-economic development in the country.

Most of the proponents of this system are of the view that the parliamentary system is not good for Pakistan, as evident from history, and therefore, Pakistan should move towards the Presidential system.

Why Parliamentary system of government Suits Pakistan?

There are certain reasons on the basis of which we can say that the parliamentary system of government favors Pakistan more than the Presidential system.

Pakistan’s Historical Experience discourages the Presidential system of government

After the creation of Pakistan in 1947, Pakistan was part of the federal parliamentary system. Although there was an office of the Governor-General, but officially Pakistan was part of the parliamentary system. Since Pakistan was a colony of Great Britain, therefore, after independence, Pakistan adopted and continued the same parliamentary system.

Similarly, the first constitution of Pakistan was also parliamentary in nature, however, the President was also given excessive powers under the first constitution. Nevertheless, to some extent, Pakistan was part of a parliamentary system.

As a result of the shortcomings of this parliamentary constitution, martial law was imposed in Pakistan in 1958. Ayub Khan, the then martial law administrator, later on, formed a commission for the identification of shortcomings associated with the parliamentary democracy in Pakistan. The commission informed that the parliamentary system is not suitable for the dynamics of Pakistan.

First Presidential System of Pakistan:

Hence, in 1962, a Presidential form of government was introduced with the constitution of 1962 under President Ayub. The office of the President was made so powerful that instead of a theoretical presidential system it had become a hyper-presidential system.  

Conclusion:

The parliamentary system might not be suitable for Pakistan, but compared to the Presidential system, this is the best that we have. So, instead of experimenting with a new system of government, Pakistan first should create a mature political culture that later shall be able to support the experimentation. Until that happens, the parliamentary system is most suitable for Pakistan. 

Thank you.