T HIS is with reference to the report `UK PM quits party af ter cabinet bloodbath` (July 7). It is the parliamentary system that brings political instability in most regions of the world. A case in point is Boris Johnson who lately lost his majority in the legislature the way it happened in Pakistan.

In parliamentary system, there is hardly any ability to keep political institutions running and to retain leaders at the helm.

Pakistan`s political history is a witness to the reality that it has been embroiled in politic al cri ses for long.

Since the assassination of Liaquat Ali Khan several prime ministers had to face removal time and again, until the martial law was imposed and the military stepped forward to take control.

To date, no prime minister has been able to complete the designated tenure.

There are many reasons behind the political instability that has had negative impact on the country.

In the presidential form of governance, there is a clear separation of power, combined with a system of checks and balances. This feature makes possible flexible and more stable participation in the decision-making process. This is the reason why in the last 70 years, India had 27 governments, Italy a whopping 65, Japan 35, Israel 41, while the United States had only 17.

According to a study by the American Journal of Applied Sciences, China, the U S and Malaysia have higher political stability, whereas parliamentary systems, like Pakistan,India,the Philippines and Bangladesh, have the least political stability. This is how the countries in the former group are rising as economic and administratively strong giants.

The recent resignation by Johnson proves the point that parliamentary majority is the only determining factor that keeps or removes prime ministers fromoffice.

In the United Kingdom, parliamentarymajority elects the prime minister who then remains executive as long as his party maintains its majority in the House of Commons.

Although India is one of the best parliamentary systems, it has been a victim of party bosses from Jawaharlal Nehru and Indira Gandhi to the current government. It is not faring that well as far as its system of governance is concerned.

On the other hand, Turkiye is a growing economic powerhouse. As soon as its parliament passed a constitutional amendment package following two weeks ofintense debatein2017,the country got an executive presidency. It has been without doubt wielding a great influence in the regional and international domains since the change in its form of governance.

Because term-based government is a major hurdle to long-developmental programmes and policies, parliamentary system is found to be flawed in numerous ways.

In the US, there is no military interference orexternalhand totrigger a regime change. It is almost impossible and the process of impeachment is also complex, requiring two-third majority in both houses of parliament. It is a historic f act that the constitutional continuity in the US is profoundly exceptional.

For these reasons, it is time to rethink and restructure the system of governance in Pakistan, keeping in view the current needs and requirements.

One can see Central Asian Republics (CARs), such as Kyrgyzstan, making a shift to such a system. A strong president is best suited for democracies like ours and can help bring stability on a par with countries like Kazakhstan, Iran and Russia that have strong, authoritarian and strict presidential systems that lay the groundwork for stable policies.

Abdul Qadeer Seelro Larkana