Politics
I heard, that Czech and Slovakia in recent years changed their system to direct election. If you live in a republic- how is the head of your country elected and how in your opinion should it be? In Poland btw, the President was always directly elected, since the fall of communism.
Archived post. New comments cannot be posted and votes cannot be cast.
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
where aren't they directly elected?
Germany for example
but the president is a much more ceremonial title than executive, I meant where they hold actual power
Comment removed by moderator
I'd rather say that your chancellor is the equivalent of other countries' prime ministers.
Comment removed by moderator
But don't they run party campaigns in which you would know who is the next chancellor if a certain party wins?
Comment removed by moderator
Germany, Italy, Hungary, Greece
Generally I’d say it depends on what role the president has.
If they’re a head of state, with day to day power being wielded by the head of government (prime minister/ chancellor or whatever other title), then I guess directly elected and the head of government is appointed by parliament.
Otherwise, if they do wield the power then they should be appointed by the parliament.
In Ireland there directly elected because they sign new laws/amendments into the constitution, are the head of state and represents the nation in other countries
To be honest tho if Mickey D decided he was going to say no to a referendum result then he wouldn't be president for much longer. Same goes for every president. They have a power that can't be used.
It depends on the role of the president. If they hold actual power like the US president then they should be elected. If they are only a representative like in Ireland it would be a good idea to appoint them but there's still no harm in election.
Whatever the Democratic institutions, as long as you have a representative democracy, you should elect as many representative as possible, no middle men should exist
The president is the head of state in Croatia meaning he has a more ceremonial function but nontheless has an important role in diplomacy, he is the supreme commander of the Army, has a role in secret services, approves the Prime Minister after a parliamentary election and has an important role in political crisises where they can have a say in choosing a temporary government until new elections are called upon.
But these functions are quite minimal actually and the President is mostly just flying about doing diplomacy but still has a somewhat important role in political stability and is therefore elected directly. (We are having an election tommorow). As the Constitution says: "Power comes from the people and belongs to the people".
If it is a parliamentary republic the Power is in the hand of the Parliament, a directly elected position outside of this will lead to a challenge for that power
this might have upsides (checks and balances) but can pave the way to Presidential systems.
Depends on his specific functions. In Austria for instance he's too powerful to just be elected by parliament.
Directly elected, obviously.
In Israel, we have the Knesset pick the President (whose role is ceremonial apart from picking the Prime Minister) for a seven year term, no re-election.
No, it was a big mistake to introduce it. It's damaging ours parliamentary democracy and it's pushing it to a weak half-presidential democracy similar to Framce
I would rather the President be appointed by the parliament if they're directly elected and already have significant powers. Reason being that power creep happens, and the office becomes more and more powerful as time goes on. If not, and there are sufficient fetters on the office then sure, have them directly elected.
I have with time been leaning towards abolishing elections altogether. The only way to prevent special interests from capturing the entire process is to randomly appoint the members of parliament from the national registry. They would then, in the name of parliamentary supremacy, appoint the members of the other two branches of government for a few years.
any person with power should be voted directly into his position
That's a fallacious point when you consider that we're talking about parliamentary republics.
with that answer I wanted to answer the question indirectly
Fair enough, I accept your point of view.