مرکز منطقه ای اطلاع رساني علوم و فناوري - The Debate on Presidentialism from a Comparative Perspective: Is It Possible to Evade the Building of Coalitions and the Fusion of Powers?

Abstract :

The practices of presidentialism around the world display a mixed record as far as their performance in the realms of political stability and separation of powers is concerned. Compared to earlier perceptions, presidential systems are at present considered to be more flexible and stable. In spite of the changing perception, it can be argued that presidentialism will not be able - under all circumstances - to guarantee the delivery of the two expected achievements in the case of Turkey. This study evaluates the potential in presidentialism for the formation of stable governments without the resort to forging coalitions. As it has been witnessed in the presidential regimes of the United States of America (USA), Latin America and Africa, the structural and cultural factors that incentivize or urge the Presidents to build coalitions as an inevitable or a facilitating step are explored. In a similar vein, the possibility that the presidential regimes may over time wander away from the principle of separation of powers, only to produce the outcomes that may be expected from fusion of powers systems is taken into account. The potential difficulties encountered in rejuvenating the legislatures in presidential systems and the circumstances under which balancing or controlling the powers of the President is complicated are both examined. In the light of the experiences of presidential systems in the USA, Latin America and Africa, cases in which the legislatures may find it difficult to resort to their competencies or do indeed voluntarily delegate them to the executive actors are discussed, along with other cases in which the principle of separation of powers is put into practice.