I do follow turkish news like daily sabah. Was not AKP also considering a semi-presidential system with a strong executive presidency like the French? The power of the French president depends on to what extent he controls parliament. A opposition controlled parliament basically leads to co-habitation where both the President and PM share power. While when the President's dominates parliament , it results in a pure American style presidency.
But the French president DO NOT have veto powers like US preisdent. A fixed term powerful president provides stability and foreign policy and defense remains in his hands.
US style system is not bad either. But both the french and US style have strong check
s and balances with separation of powers unlike the Russian and Latin american style which have super presidencies . Turkey has a much more fairer electoral model than US or France. The US legislative electoral model is not at all fair. Neither is the US president directly elected. A
directly elected president and proportional representation parliament as you have now is a fairer good governance model than US or france. Constitutionally increasing the power of the president with proper checks and balances would make it even better IMO.
@Zulkarneyn @yason @T-123456 @Orez @KediKesenFare
There are 25 countries that have presidential system, and only 5 of which has democracy, so with the current ''one'' in Turkey It is fair to ask Presidential or Dictatorial it is in the poll.
I will not go further, I believe i made my point before.
The countries that become dictatorial do not care about presidential and parliamentary model. Dictators throw the constitution out the window no matter whether that constitution is presidential or parliamentary. That's why they are called dictators. BD constitution was "parliamentary" but it did not stop Hasina from from becoming a vicious dictator.
I support it if it is based on the american system. History in politics have shown that coalitions don't work in Turkey and a presidential system will ensure that the executive power(the president) will run the country. The problem now is that the executive power and legaslative power is in hands of Erdogan. He can do as he pleases as long he doesn't change the constitution. In the presidential system the senate has to approve laws.
That would be in any system. When the president's party controls parliament , he inevitably have legislative powers. The French president also have legislative powers simply by the fact that his party is majority in parliament. Same goes for S.korea , Indoneshia etc. What you need is checks and balances like a independent judiciary , may be an upper house with equal legislative powers , a proportionally elected parliament which you already have etc etc.
The US system is unique btw and may not be possible to replicate in turkey. They have a very unfair 2 party system with a flawed electoral system. Both the Republicans and Democrats are basically each an aggregation of many smaller ideological groups which in any other country would have their own parties. Thus even a Democrat president Obama sometimes have a hard time convincing a Democrat majority congress to pass bills of his choosing. Not to mention US is a Federation unlike Turkey.
For me, if it will bring "Federation System", i am against it. If we will keep our uniter system, i support it. It depends of the proposal that will be sent to National Assembly.
Actually there are many examples where federalism provided checks and balances to power and resulted in stable , prosperous states. Eg. US , Canada , Australia , Switzerland, Germany etc etc. Germany btw is ethnically homogeneous unlike Turkey. Also federalism is a good system to govern multi ethnic countries. The Ottoman empire was much more federal than many current officially federal states like India, malaysia etc which are actually pseudo federations.
![[TR]AHMET](/data/avatars/m/27/27358.jpg?1397822937){kind=avatar}
