Representative democracy: parliamentary and presidential systems

Detail

1. What representative democracy means

• Representative democracy: citizens do not make every decision themselves. They elect representatives, and those representatives make laws and run the government for them.
• The vote is given through universal adult franchise: every adult citizen can vote, whatever their religion, caste, gender, education or wealth.
• Elections are held at regular, fixed intervals: every 5 years in India and every 4 years for the US president.

• The government stays accountable: it must explain its work to the people, and the people can remove it at the next election.

• Why this form is used: direct democracy (all citizens decide every matter together) cannot work in a country with India's population and size. Representative democracy is the only practical form for large states.

• Old roots, modern form: India had earlier traditions of rule by assemblies, such as the ganas (early republics) and the village assemblies described in the Uttaramerur inscriptions. Modern representative democracy, with a vote for every adult, is much newer.

2. When democracy began: the NCERT dates table

Country	Year democracy was established (NCERT, Class 7)
USA	1787
Switzerland	1848
India	1947 (the Constitution and universal adult franchise came into force on 26 January 1950)
Germany	1949
Kenya	1964
Nepal	2008

• The "first democracy" trap: for a long time, older democracies let only some people vote.
• In the UK, all adults got the vote only in 1928.
• In the USA, all adults could actually vote only by 1965. The Voting Rights Act, 1965 removed the barriers that had kept many Black citizens from voting.
• India gave universal adult franchise from the very start (1950), with no step-by-step widening.

3. Parliamentary vs presidential: the two main types

3.1 Parliamentary system (India, UK, Canada, Australia)

• Parliamentary system: the executive (the people who run the government) comes from the legislature and answers to it.
• Constitutional anchors in India (Article 75):
• Art. 75(1): the President appoints the Prime Minister. The President appoints the other ministers on the PM's advice [4].
• Art. 75(2): ministers hold office "during the pleasure of the President". In practice, this means for as long as they keep the Lok Sabha's support [4].
• Art. 75(3): the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the House of the People (Lok Sabha) [4].

• Art. 75(5): a minister who is not a member of either House of Parliament for six months in a row stops being a minister when that period ends [4]. So a non-MP can become a minister but must win a seat within six months.

• Collective responsibility: all ministers rise and fall together. If the Lok Sabha passes a no-confidence motion (a vote saying it no longer supports the government), the whole Council of Ministers must resign, not just one minister.

• Who voters elect: only the legislature. The government is then formed by the party or coalition that has a majority in the Lok Sabha.
• Two executives:
• Nominal executive: a head who has formal powers but acts on advice. In India this is the President; in the UK, the monarch.
• Real executive: the people who actually use power. This is the PM and the Council of Ministers.

3.2 Presidential system (USA)

• Presidential system: the executive is separate from and independent of the legislature.
• Key features:
• The president is directly elected by the people (in the US, through an electoral college) for a fixed term.
• The president needs no confidence vote from the legislature. The legislature cannot remove the president simply because it disagrees with the president's policies.
• The president answers to the people, at the next election.

• One head is both head of state and head of government.

• Separation of powers: the legislature, the executive and the judiciary are kept apart, and each has its own job.

• Checks and balances: each branch can limit the others.
• Veto: the president can refuse to sign a bill passed by Congress.
• Impeachment: the legislature can remove the president for serious wrongdoing through a special trial-like process. This is not a vote on policy.

3.3 Side-by-side comparison

Feature	Parliamentary (India, UK, Canada)	Presidential (USA)
Where the executive comes from	Drawn from the legislature (ministers must be MPs, or become one within 6 months, Art. 75(5))	Separate from the legislature; members of the executive are not members of Congress
How long it lasts	While it keeps Lok Sabha confidence (Art. 75(3)); no fixed term	Fixed term (4 years in the USA)
Removal	A no-confidence motion can bring it down at any time	Only by impeachment, not by a policy vote
Who voters elect	Only the legislature	The legislature and the president separately
Head	Nominal head (President or monarch) plus a real executive (PM)	One head who is both
Main strength	Responsibility: the executive is checked every day	Stability: the executive is safe for a fixed term
Main risk	Unstable coalitions, early collapse of governments	Deadlock between president and legislature; less day-to-day accountability

4. NCERT country table: how legislatures and executives differ

Country	System and key feature
India	Parliamentary. The Lok Sabha is stronger than the Rajya Sabha: the government answers only to the Lok Sabha.
USA	Presidential. The Senate and the House of Representatives are co-equal, so both must agree to a law.
South Korea	A president plus a unicameral (single-house) National Assembly.
Australia	Parliamentary, led by a Prime Minister. The Senate is almost equal to the lower house but cannot originate or amend money bills (bills only about taxes and government spending).
Canada	Parliamentary. A Governor-General represents the monarch as the nominal head.
UK	Constitutional monarchy (the king or queen is head of state but has only formal powers). It has an unwritten constitution (no single constitutional document) and parliamentary sovereignty (Parliament can make or unmake any law, and no court can strike it down).
Switzerland	Executive power lies with a Federal Council, a group of members, not one person.

5. The Westminster model and India's changes to it

• Westminster model: the British-style parliamentary system, named after the Palace of Westminster, where the UK Parliament sits. Its main features:
• A nominal head of state (the monarch).
• A cabinet collectively responsible to the elected lower house (the House of Commons).

• First-past-the-post (FPTP) elections: the candidate with the most votes in a constituency wins, even without a majority of votes.

• How India adapted it:

Feature	UK (Westminster)	India
Constitution	Unwritten	Written
Is Parliament supreme?	Yes (parliamentary sovereignty)	No: the Constitution is supreme, and courts can strike down laws through judicial review
Structure	Unitary (power held at the centre)	Federal (power divided between the Union and the states)
Head of state	Hereditary monarch	Elected President
Same as the UK	Nominal head, collective responsibility, FPTP	Kept

• Judicial review: the power of courts to examine a law or government action and cancel it if it breaks the Constitution.

6. Why India chose the parliamentary system: Ambedkar, 4 November 1948

• On 4 November 1948, B.R. Ambedkar, Chairman of the Drafting Committee, moved the Draft Constitution in the Constituent Assembly [2][3].
• His argument, step by step:
• A democratic executive must meet two conditions: it must be stable and it must be responsible [2][3].
• No system can give both in equal measure. A system gives either more stability and less responsibility, or more responsibility and less stability [2][3].
• The American and Swiss systems give more stability but less responsibility. The British system gives more responsibility but less stability [2][3].

• A non-parliamentary executive does not depend on Parliament, so it tends to answer less to the legislature. A parliamentary executive depends on a majority in Parliament, so it answers more [3].

• The Drafting Committee chose responsibility.

• Two ways responsibility is checked:
• Daily assessment: MPs check the government every day through questions, resolutions, no-confidence motions, adjournment motions and debates.

• Periodic assessment: voters judge the government at each election (every 5 years in India).

• Exam point: Ambedkar grouped the Swiss system with the American one as "stable", even though Switzerland is not presidential. Its executive, the Federal Council, also cannot be removed by a no-confidence vote [2].

7. Semi-presidential systems: a mixed model

• Semi-presidential system: a directly elected president shares executive power with a prime minister, and the PM is responsible to the legislature.

7.1 France (Fifth Republic, 1958)

• The 1958 constitution created a mixed (semi-presidential) form of government. It was meant to end the political instability of the earlier French republics [6].
• Charles de Gaulle drafted it with Michel Debré after the May 1958 crisis in Algeria [6].
• The president is elected by direct universal suffrage and is head of state [8].
• The 1958 system gave the executive much more power at the expense of the National Assembly. The president chooses the PM, and the PM stays responsible to the National Assembly [6].
• Cohabitation: the president and the prime minister belong to rival parties [7].
• How it happens:
  • The president's party loses its majority in the National Assembly.
  • The president must then appoint a PM from the majority side [8].
  • Power ends up shared between rival parties.
• France has had several periods of cohabitation since 1986 [6][7].

7.2 Sri Lanka

• Sri Lanka has had an executive presidency since 1978.
• Later amendments moved power back and forth:

Amendment	Year	Direction
19th	2015	Cut presidential powers and strengthened Parliament
20th	2020	Gave strong powers back to the president
21st	2022	Cut presidential powers again

• Lesson: power can swing between the president and Parliament when one strong leader or party can change the constitution easily.

8. Checks at work: South Korea, 2024–25

• The crisis, step by step:
• 3 December 2024: President Yoon Suk-yeol declared martial law (army rule in place of normal civil law), claiming he was fighting "pro-North Korean" forces in government [5].
• Within hours: the National Assembly voted against it, and Yoon withdrew it [5].
• 14 December 2024: the Assembly impeached him by 204–85 votes, after about a dozen members of his own party (PPP) voted against him. His powers were suspended, and Han Duck-soo became acting president [5].
• 4 April 2025: the Constitutional Court unanimously upheld the impeachment and removed him from office. The Court said he had harmed constitutional institutions such as the National Assembly and violated people's basic rights by using the army and police [5].

• Afterwards: his insurrection trial began on 14 April 2025. In 2026 he was found guilty of leading an insurrection and sentenced to life imprisonment [5].

• Lesson: even in a presidential system, where the president cannot be removed by a no-confidence vote, the legislature and the courts can remove a president who abuses power. This is separation of powers and checks and balances at work.

• (Parliamentary, presidential and semi-presidential systems are covered in more depth in the union-executive note.)

Prelims Hooks

• Art. 75(3): the Council of Ministers is collectively responsible to the Lok Sabha only, not to the Rajya Sabha. Trap: "to Parliament" is wrong [4].
• Art. 75(5): a non-member can be a minister for at most six consecutive months without becoming an MP of either House [4].
• Ambedkar (4 November 1948): American and Swiss systems mean more stability; the British system means more responsibility. India chose responsibility [2][3].
• Universal suffrage trap: UK 1928; USA effectively 1965 (Voting Rights Act); India from 1950, with no step-by-step widening.
• NCERT dates: USA 1787 · Switzerland 1848 · India 1947 · Germany 1949 · Kenya 1964 · Nepal 2008.
• Australia: the Senate is near-equal but cannot originate or amend money bills. USA: Senate and House are co-equal. South Korea: unicameral National Assembly.
• India's changes to Westminster: written constitution, judicial review, federalism, elected head of state. Kept: FPTP, nominal head, collective responsibility.
• Cohabitation: the president and PM come from rival parties. It is a feature of semi-presidential France (since 1986) and is not possible in a pure presidential system [6][7].
• Sri Lanka: executive presidency since 1978; amendments 19th (2015) → 20th (2020) → 21st (2022) moved power back and forth.
• South Korea: martial law 3 Dec 2024 → impeachment 204–85 (14 Dec 2024) → Constitutional Court removal, unanimous, 4 Apr 2025 [5].

Mains Points

• Stability vs responsibility (GS-II): Ambedkar's choice gives India daily accountability through Question Hour, motions and the threat of no-confidence. The cost has been unstable coalitions in some periods. A presidential system would give a fixed term, but power would gather in one person and president and legislature could deadlock. Weaker parliamentary checks (fewer sitting days, less debate) reduce the "responsibility" that justified the choice [2][3].
• India's own version of Westminster: India took the British form but added a written constitution, judicial review, federalism and an elected President. So the Constitution, not Parliament, is supreme. This lets India keep parliamentary responsibility while protecting rights and the states.
• Lessons from other countries: France's cohabitation shows power-sharing between rivals. Sri Lanka's back-and-forth amendments (2015–2022) show the danger of designing power around one leader. South Korea (2024–25) shows that a legislature and an independent court can stop a president from abusing emergency powers [5][6].
• Debate on a presidential system for India: supporters point to stability and a directly elected leader. Critics say it would weaken responsibility, would not suit a diverse federal country with many parties, and would risk one person dominating, which is exactly what the Drafting Committee wanted to avoid.