"A fragmented mandate tests the distinction between the largest party and a workable majority." Discuss with reference to Israel's 2026 government formation and India's parliamentary practice.

In a parliamentary system, the head of government is whoever commands the legislature's confidence, not simply the leader of the largest party. When no party wins a majority, both Israel's 2026 government formation and Indian practice show that a workable majority counts for more than seat rank.

Israel 2026: majority over rank

• Likud stayed the largest party with 27 seats [1]. Yet President Herzog asked Yashar leader Gadi Eisenkot to form the government on 8 November 2026 [2].
• The deciding factor was recommendations: 67 MKs backed Eisenkot and 46 backed Netanyahu [1]. Under the Basic Law: The Government, the President chooses after consulting the parliamentary groups, and the nominee gets 28 days, extendable by up to 14 [3].
• Arithmetic is not coherence: the 67 is made up of 48 Zionist-bloc and 19 Arab-led MKs. Some of Eisenkot's right-wing allies refuse to govern with Arab support, so a minority government with outside support remains possible [1]. Netanyahu, meanwhile, is pushing a national unity government [4].

India's parliamentary practice

• Constitutional basis: under Art. 75(1) the President appoints the PM. Under Art. 75(3) the ministry is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha [5]. Confidence is the test, not seat rank.
• Floor test: in S.R. Bommai (1994), the Supreme Court held that a majority must be proved on the floor of the House, not in Raj Bhavan [6].
• Order of invitation: the Sarkaria Commission ranked claimants as pre-poll alliance, then largest party with others' support, then post-poll coalition. Rameshwar Prasad (2006) struck down the Bihar dissolution and warned Governors against blocking a post-poll claim to a majority [7].
• Precedent: in 1996, the largest party (BJP) was invited to form the government, but it lasted only 13 days because it could not secure a majority [8].

The core tension

• Inviting the largest party is predictable but can lead to unstable, short-lived governments and horse-trading.
• Inviting a post-poll majority reflects the House's will, but the resulting coalition may lack ideological coherence, as Israel's Arab-party dilemma shows.

Both cases point to the same rule: legitimacy comes from demonstrated confidence, not seat rank. India should codify the Sarkaria guidelines and require prompt floor tests, which would keep the discretion of Governors and Presidents transparent and uphold constitutional morality in a hung House.