World's states colored by systems ofgovernment:Parliamentary systems: Head of government is elected or nominated by and accountable to the legislature.
Presidential system: Head of government (president) is popularly elected and independent of the legislature.
Presidential republic
Hybrid systems:
Semi-presidential republic: Executive president is independent of the legislature; head of government is appointed by the president and is accountable to the legislature.
Assembly-independent republic: Head of government (president or directory) is elected by the legislature, but is not accountable to it.
Other systems:
Theocratic republic: Supreme Leader is both head of state and faith and holds significant executive and legislative power
While theWeimar Republic (1919–1933) andFinland (from 1919 to 2000) exemplified early semi-presidential systems, the term "semi-presidential" was first introduced in 1959, in an article by the journalistHubert Beuve-Méry,[5] and popularized by a 1978 work written by the political scientistMaurice Duverger.[6] Both men intended to describe theFrench Fifth Republic (established in 1958).[1][2][3][4]
Maurice Duverger's original definition of semi-presidentialism stated that the president had to be elected, possess significant power, and serve for a fixed term.[7] Modern definitions merely declare that the head of state has to be elected and that a separate prime minister that is dependent on parliamentary confidence has to lead the legislative.[7]
Under thepresident-parliamentary system, the prime minister and cabinet are dually accountable to the president and the parliament. The president chooses the prime minister and the cabinet but must have the support of a parliamentary majority for his choice. To remove a prime minister, or the whole cabinet, from power, the president can either dismiss them, or the parliament can remove them through avote of no confidence. This form of semi-presidentialism is much closer to pure presidentialism. It is used in:Azerbaijan,Guinea-Bissau,[8]Kazakhstan,Mozambique,Russia, andTaiwan. It was also used in Ukraine (first between 1996 and 2005; then from 2010 to 2014), Georgia (from 2004 to 2013), South Korea under theFourth andFifth republics, and inGermany during theWeimar Republic.[13][14]
In a semi-presidential system, the president and the prime minister may sometimes be from different political parties. This is called "cohabitation", a term which originated in France after the situation first arose in the 1980s. Cohabitation can create either an effective system ofchecks and balances, or a period of bitter and tense stonewalling, depending on the attitudes of the two leaders, the ideologies of themselves/their parties, and the demands of their supporters.[15]
The distribution of power between the president and the prime minister can vary greatly between countries.
InFrance, for example, in the case of cohabitation, the president overseesforeign policy anddefence policy (these are generally calledles prérogatives présidentielles, presidential prerogatives) and the prime minister is in charge ofdomestic policy andeconomic policy.[16] In this case, the division of responsibilities between theprime minister and thepresident is not explicitly stated in the constitution, but has evolved as apolitical convention based on the constitutional principle that the prime minister is appointed (with the subsequent approval of a parliament majority) and dismissed by the president.[17] On the other hand, whenever the president and the prime minister represent the same political party, which leads the cabinet, they tend to exercisede facto control over all fields of policy via the prime minister. However, it is up to the president to decide how much autonomy is left to said prime minister.
In most cases, cohabitation results from a system in which the two executives are not elected at the same time or for the same term. For example, in 1981, France elected both aSocialist president and legislature, which yielded a Socialist premier. But while the president's term of office was for seven years, theNational Assembly only served for five. When, in the1986 legislative election, the French people elected a right-of-centre assembly, Socialist presidentFrançois Mitterrand was forced into cohabitation with right-wing premierJacques Chirac.[15]
However, in 2000, amendments to theFrench constitution reduced the length of the French president's term to five years. This has significantly lowered the chances of cohabitation occurring, as parliamentary and presidential elections may now be conducted within a shorter span of each other.
The incorporation of elements from both presidential and parliamentary republics can bring certain advantageous elements; however, it also creates disadvantages, often related to the confusion produced by mixed authority patterns.[18][19] It can be argued that a semi-presidential republic is more likely to engage indemocratic backsliding andpower struggles,[20] especially ones with a president-parliamentary system.[21][22]
Advantages
Parliament can remove an unpopular prime minister, therefore maintaining stability throughout the president'sfixed term.
In most semi-presidential systems, important segments of bureaucracy are taken away from the president, creating additional checks and balances where the running of the day-to-day government and its issues are separate from the head of state, and as such, its issues tend to be looked at on their own merits, with their ebbs and flows and not necessarily tied to who the head of state is.
Having a separate head of government who needs to command the confidence of the parliament is seen as being more in tune to the political and economic development of the country. Because the head of government is elected from the parliament, there is little potential for political gridlock to occur, since the parliament has the power to remove the head of government if needed.
Disadvantages
The system providescover for the president, as unpopular policies could be blamed on the prime minister, who runs the day-to-day operations of the government.
It creates a sense of confusion towardsaccountability, as there is no relatively clear sense of who is responsible for policy successes and failures.
It creates both confusion and inefficiency in thelegislative process, since the capacity ofvotes of confidence makes the prime minister respond to the parliament.
Republics with a semi-presidential system of government
^TheGreek Constitution of 1973, enacted in the waning days of theGreek Junta, provided for a powerful directly-elected president and a government dependent on Parliamentary confidence. Neither of these provisions was implemented, as the regime collapsed eight months after the Constitution's promulgation.
^All South Korean constitutions since 1963 provided for a strong executive presidency; in addition, the formally authoritarianYushin Constitution of theFourth Republic established a presidential power to dissolve theNational Assembly, nominally counterbalanced by a binding vote of no confidence. Both of these provisions were retained during theFifth Republic but repealed upon the transition to democracy and the establishment of the presidentialSixth Republic.
^abDuverger (1980)."A New Political System Model: Semi-Presidential Government".European Journal of Political Research (quarterly).8 (2):165–187.doi:10.1111/j.1475-6765.1980.tb00569.x.The concept of a semi-presidential form of government, as used here, is defined only by the content of the constitution. A political regime is considered semi-presidential if the constitution which established it combines three elements: (1) the president of the republic is elected by universal suffrage, (2) the president possesses quite considerable powers; (3) the president has opposite him a prime minister and ministers who possess executive and governmental power and can stay in office only if the parliament does not show its opposition to this team of prime minister and ministers.
^abBahro, Horst; Bayerlein, Bernhard H.;Veser, Ernst[in German] (October 1998). "Duverger's concept: Semi-presidential government revisited".European Journal of Political Research (quarterly).34 (2):201–224.doi:10.1111/1475-6765.00405.S2CID153349701.The conventional analysis of government in democratic countries by political science and constitutional law starts from the traditional types of presidentialism and parliamentarism. There is, however, a consensus that governments in the various countries work quite differently. This is why some authors have inserted distinctive features into their analytical approaches, at the same time maintaining the general dichotomy. Maurice Duverger, trying to explain the French Fifth Republic, found that this dichotomy was not adequate for this purpose. He therefore resorted to the concept of 'semi-presidential government': The characteristics of the concept are (Duverger 1974: 122, 1978: 28, 1980: 166): 1. The president of the republic is elected by universal suffrage, 2. The president possesses considerable powers and 3. The president has opposite him a prime minister who possesses executive and governmental powers and can stay in office only if parliament does not express its opposition to this prime minister.
^Veser, Ernst[in German] (23 September 1997)."Semi-Presidentialism-Duverger's Concept — A New Political System Model"(PDF). Department of Education, School of Education,University of Cologne, zh. pp. 39–60. Retrieved21 August 2017.Duhamel has developed the approach further: He stresses that the French construction does not correspond to either parliamentary or the presidential form of government, and then develops the distinction of 'système politique' and 'régime constitutionnel'. While the former comprises the exercise of power that results from the dominant institutional practice, the latter is the totality of the rules for the dominant institutional practice of power. In this way, France appears as 'presidentialist system' endowed with a 'semi-presidential regime' (1983: 587). By this standard, he recognizes Duverger'spléiade as semi-presidential regimes, as well as Poland, Romania, Bulgaria and Lithuania (1993: 87).
^Shugart, Matthew Søberg (December 2005)."Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive And Mixed Authority Patterns"(PDF).French Politics.3 (3):323–351.doi:10.1057/palgrave.fp.8200087. Retrieved21 August 2017.Even if the president has no discretion in the forming of cabinets or the right to dissolve parliament, his or her constitutional authority can be regarded as 'quite considerable' in Duverger's sense if cabinet legislation approved in parliament can be blocked by the people's elected agent. Such powers are especially relevant if an extraordinary majority is required to override a veto, as in Mongolia, Poland, and Senegal. In these cases, while the government is fully accountable to Parliament, it cannot legislate without taking the potentially different policy preferences of the president into account.
^Kudelia, Serhiy (4 May 2018). "Presidential activism and government termination in dual-executive Ukraine".Post-Soviet Affairs.34 (4):246–261.doi:10.1080/1060586X.2018.1465251.S2CID158492144.
Elgie, Robert (2011).Semi-Presidentialism: Sub-Types And Democratic Performance.Comparative Politics. (Oxford Scholarship Online Politics), Oxford University PressISBN9780199585984
Sartori, Giovanni (1997).Comparative constitutional engineering: an inquiry into structures, incentives, and outcomes (2nd ed.). Washington Square, New York: New York University Press.ISBN9780333675090.
Shugart, Matthew Søberg; Carey, John M. (1992).Presidents and assemblies: constitutional design and electoral dynamics. Cambridge England New York: Cambridge University Press.ISBN9780521429900.
_(cropped).svg)
