Friday, July 27, 2007

I Vote for Separation of Powers.

A lot of hype and debates recently on what system we should vote for. As far as I am concerned I will vote for a system which will have separation of powers; as in a presidential system. I would not want one party to dominate almost everything about the system. I would not want to place cabinet ministers in the parliament. I would want to be able to vote for the leader of the nation and I would want that leader to have 2 terms of 4 years or just one term of 5 years. I want a system where the minority party has a say in the governance and legislation. I want a system where the people as a nation has the power to choose; not the people of a particular party only.

And I strongly don't want to go for a system blindly; just cos some people tell me this is the only way to get rid of a dictator. I feel this is not about choosing a leader its about a choice we make about the future of our nation. Its not about a personnel flight that the parties been having for the last two or three years. Its about making a choice; which will be the best system for Maldives; not UK , India or Japan. We are talking about Maldives here and its future. Its not an election where we get to choose who gets to lead. If thats the impression some are having; I ask and request them to wake up. This is about selecting a system. So choose after thinking and researching. Choose what you feel is best for you. Not because I or DRP or MDP says so. You make your choice. That is your right. Don't let others influence you because they have other objectives to achieve.

As a moral and social obligation the parties must educate the people on the systems. Which has not happened. Mostly what we have seen so far; was just parties trying to promote which systems they want to go for. Never educating the people of the advantages and disadvantages of both the systems. Its sad to know the people we trusted and thought were the heroes of our nation has turned out to be just immoral 'business men' only.

If you still need further readings below are some links that might help.

PRESIDENTIAL VS. PARLIAMENTARY SYSTEMS OF GOVERNMENT

Governing Systems and Executive-Legislative Relations(Presidential, Parliamentary and Hybrid Systems)

14 comments:

Frozen Solid said...

Did you know that in a presidential system you cannot question minister about his or her work, and that he is only answerable to the president alone?

Did you know that even in a parliamentary system you can choose the head of state by popular vote? yes, DRP campaign slogan is a big lie, it is not only the presidential system which allows you to elect you choice of president.

Did you know that we can adjust end fix any downfall in the parliamentary system, just like almost all the countries have done. just modify to the environment your with.

chopey said...

Yes; since in the parliamentary system the cabinet consists of the members of the parliament and from the ruling party; so obviously they should answer to them directly if needed. thats logical. In the presidential system the cabinet is selected by the president; its him team of choice; and he the choice of the public. So these two systems are different. But I don't see anything wrong there. And did you know in the presidential system via the committee system, the legislature has extensive powers to call expert witnesses, members of the cabinet, presidential advisors, etc. for public or private hearings before the legislature. So I don't see any problems there. Because the senior officials of the executive branch are separately elected or appointed, the presidential political system is characterised by a separation of powers, wherein the executive and legislative branches are independent of one another.

Yeah; we can always invent our own system; but when there is a proven one which fits perfectly to what we have been crying for so long why not go for it. And in the parliamentary system in reality the president is just a figure head. Its not practical and too expensive and "baru" for a country like Maldives. The sole control is on the prime minter who is most likely the leader of the ruling party. Anyway As I said; its our own choice. My choice and what I feel what is best for Maldives; today and for the future is a presidential system. I don't trust in the words; "we will go for this system today and when we are able to throw Maumoon, we will change back to the right system". I don't simply trust that and believe in that. Sorry; again my view. My vote is fixed. Its going for a presidential system. Long live freedom.

idhikeeli said...

Even if chopey choose a Parliamentary System we would have respected his choice. Because instead of just believing what some political parties are saying, he has made an effort to find out more about the two systems and come to a logical conclusion.

For English-educated young people of the Internet generation there are vast resources out there on Internet to find out more about the two systems. They don't need to be puppets of the political parties.

As for the people who are without access to Internet, their situation is worse because they hear only the lies that the media and political parties are spreading.

Frozen Solid: Like chopey said in a Presidential System there are senate hearing committees and other committees from the Parliament which makes even the Cabinet accountable. It is a misconception that cabinet is not accountable in Presidential System. However, MDP and even our parliament members are not highlighting how the accountability works in a Presidential System.

cant said...

Hello chopey:

I don't have time to write something of my own. But here are some scholarly links with alternative, and strongly argued views:

http://www.law.yale.edu/documents/pdf/Faculty/TheNewSeperationofPowers.pdf

http://islandia.law.yale.edu/sela/SELA2006/papers/Marcelo%20Alegre%20_English_.pdf

Also check Argentinian philosopher Santiago Nino's 'The Constitution of Deliberative Democracy'

chopey said...

Someone gave me this link. Its really well written and has all the information needed. It speaks the truth about the systems, chk out http://www.adhaalathu.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=419&Itemid=1

cant said...

If you truly mean what you have said about the link, I have nothing more to say or post here.

idhikeeli said...

cant: It is nice that you have provided links offering alternative arguments. The truth is no system is perfect and there are flaws in presidential as well as parliamentary systems. Much reform is needed in USA and the case is similar in UK and even in India. The problem we have is we have politicians from both DRP and MDP claiming that their chosen system is perfect. Most of the examples in the links that you have given falls into the context of Latin America. There are issues that are both relevant and irrelevant to Maldives in those examples. Surely most of our MPs didn't study scholarly debates on the two systems when the issue was on the Special Majlis floor. Anyway it is nice to see a healthy debate developing on Internet.

shafiu said...

both system suck.
i want a BSD system.

Maldiveshealth said...

Quote:
"Frozen Solid: Like chopey said in a Presidential System there are senate hearing committees and other committees from the Parliament which makes even the Cabinet accountable. It is a misconception that cabinet is not accountable in Presidential System. "

NOW I CANT AGREE WITH THAT.Yes there might exist a system only on PAPER about senate committes or who ever in the name of making cabinet and others accountable in a presidential system.

DOES IT WORK? WILL IT WORK?

NO.. NO..

US is an example where it does not work. The senate has the power and majority at the moment. The president is a sleeping duck. But No one can remove him from the position.No one can impeach him either.

WHY ?

Cos that is the major flaw and weakness which makes the presidential system unworthy.

If a parliamentary system was in place , the power is there for the majority party who wins the election. They can kick ass.

People vote for the parliamentarians in a parliamentary system.

There will be more input from the grass roots.

A misconception being distributed is that parliament system does not give a chance for us to elect the leader.

It does in all its way.

We , the people, choose which party to rule the country. If we do not like the party policies in place , then it is simple.. we dont vote for that party.

The plurality at its best can be found in parliamentary system.. Not many people realise that.

chopey said...

similarly if we talk abt reality taking aside what is on paper. Here in Maldives till today about 80% of the seats of MP's have been bought over with money. People like Mr. Jaabir, Shiyam and Gahdhoo Zaahir and alike have done this even in the last election. So this means we let these people decide over our future. Its easy to buy votes off one atoll; but not so much easy when it comes to one election for a president. Anyway there is loop holes in each. But I still feel I don't wanna hand over the TOTAL power to bunch of business men; who's main interest is making money. We are witnessing this even today in the parliament. Have we not seen enough corruption from these people; and the fact that they don't care about the ppl? Any way its a choice we need to make when we vote; we need to think and decide on it. Finally point should be each of our decisions must be respected as long as its our own individual decision (without external influence and we know what we are voting for).

idhikeeli said...

Maldiveshealth: Accountability works in Presidential System not only on PAPER but in reality as well. Senate hearing committees and other committees have been functioning in USA for decades. With a majority the parliament in USA can impeach their President. This has happened in the past. Richard Nixon was impeached. Just because George W Bush is unpopular does not mean that the Parliament is trying to impeach him. Bush will no longer be President after November 2008 when he will complete two terms in office and exit the White House. Whereas in a parliamentary system, Prime Ministers rule for years with the support of their party. Their rule leads to the 'tyranny of the majority'.

Maldiveshealth said...

It is obvious that Idhikeeli knows very little about what is happening in the US political arena.

There have been several calls to impeach cheney and bush.. Becos the system in place is not allowing them to do so.. There is power play in this..

The power play cannot be challenged in a presidentail system. What is on paper cannot be changed easily..

Parliamentary system can change this power play.. can reduce this power play in progress..

And copey, how can u say we should not be affected by any influence? That is so politically incorrect.

The beauty of parliamentary system is just what you have said idikeeli. But what you havent said is that the prime minister has and must call for something called an EARLY ELECTION if he has no support among the public or the members of the parliament.
I am not going to further debate this. People can read stuff but if they do not fully understand what they read, i cant help it. Lets just hope for the best.

idhikeeli said...

It is also obvious that Maldivesheath doesn't really know what is happening in the US and UK political arenas. US parliament had impeached two presidents in the past. That is a fact. Search in Wikipedia about US Congress and you will find enough information about how Congress holds the Executive accountable. Also check Congressional Oversight.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Congressional_oversight

There is a good article by Abdulla Shinan, published in Adduvas, and now in Idhikeeli blog about Tony Blair's role in sending British soldiers to Iraq, etc. Tony Blair did not respect the opinion of the majority of people and even some of his Cabinet members. That is also the 'beauty of parliamentary system'.

Now don't say "see Blair has resigned now". Did Blair call for an early election when he was so unpopular? He ruled on his own terms and left on his own terms.

cant said...

Indhikeeli you are misleading or mistaken. What the argument of parliamentarianism says is in that system there is a mechanical feature which is more easily available to remove an unpopular head than there is in presidentialism.