India- Does it Need Presidential Form of Government?

India got independence in 1947. At that time Indians adopted parliamentary form of Government. This was similar to that in Great Britain. This system has served India well for some decades. But does it continue doing that now? Are Indians blocking their progress with parliamentary form of Government? This is a question that is being asked many times and no body has the guts to discuss about this in parliament and go ahead with change if found suitable. Why- because all parties feel that with Presidential Form Of Government they will lose whatever clout they have in government. How has parliamentary system fared in last ten years? It requires discussion.

During last decade India has been having coalition governments. A small group whose support is vital to its survival can dictate this kind of government. A party with about ten MPs can make the government do what it wants. Let us talk of the nuclear deal. There is a general view that India will benefit with it. But the strong opposition from left has made it impossible to go ahead. Why is the left opposing it- because it is being offered by the USA. Had it been offered by China or Russia, left would have agreed to the deal even if it were not in national interest. In the garb of national interest, left parties are enjoying a huge ego trip and blocking every progress possible. This would not have been possible if India had Presidential Form Of Government.

Today the Prime Minister looks without any power to do anything except having non stop talks with the left and trying to convince them. The left parties threaten to withdraw support every other day but do not do so. They are playing a waiting game that will ultimately show the Government in a very bad light. But the situation is so complex that Congress party does not know what it should do. It is a tragedy of highest proportion

Post a Comment