The difficult adaptation process: Presidentialism versus parliamentarism

Abstract

Difficult because it necessitates redesigning institutions to fit the new political context of pluralism and competition, where we find a bipolarity in the proposals for this purpose; difficult because it is complicated for political actors to agree on a refounding of the political regime; difficult because this adaptation process must clearly define the roles that the government and Congress should play, whose relationship will have to be rethought so that the general will—to borrow Jean-Jacques Rousseau's expression—manifested in elections or in procedures of semi-direct democracy, is respected.

In this regard, we believe that this difficult process of adapting the Mexican political system to democracy will necessarily culminate in one of two main positions: those who advocate for a comprehensive reform of the 1917 Constitution, calling it renewed or limited presidentialism, and those of us who advocate for drafting a new constitution to adopt a majority-rule parliamentary system. But regardless of whether the constitution is comprehensively reformed or a new political pact is drafted, political institutions must adapt to a new political reality of competitive pluralism.

Constitutional theory recognizes two major paradigms distinguished by the way in which the government is legitimized. From this premise—the legitimization of power—arises the significant difference between the Washington model, known as presidential, and the Westminster model, known as parliamentary.

Logically, and in keeping with pluralist democracy, various ideas have emerged proposing solutions to the challenges of governance in Mexico. While all agree on the need to adapt the Mexican Constitution to political competition, some proposals differ on the direction that the reform of Mexican constitutionalism should take to guarantee governability and, consequently, strengthen Mexican democracy. Thus, we find a bipolarity in the ideas surrounding the design of government: presidential or parliamentary. Which model is more suitable for Mexican democracy? Which of these paradigms guarantees efficient and effective governance?

For an objective understanding, we must first know what these models consist of, and then examine their advantages and disadvantages, viewed from the perspective of the challenges facing Mexican politics.