When the Presidential election of India rolls around, The people aren’t involved in the electoral process but it is the MPs and MLA’s of the State and National Assemblies who elect the President. So my questions stand thusly:-
Two forms of democracy are common worldwide:
There are good reasons from history and political theory to prefer one or the other. It weakens the separation of powers to have the executive elected by the legislative. On the other hand, the budget authority of the legislative controls key actions of the executive, so it would be inconsistent to have an executive of a different political orientation execute it.
But as long as India has a prime minister who is the head of government, it would be inconsistent to have a directly elected president who is head of state. If the ceremonial representative of the state has a popular mandate and the governing representative of the state does not, that undercuts the ability of the prime minister to govern.
So if the president was directly elected, one would have to do away with the prime minister position and adopt a system like the US or France (where the prime minister is appointed by the president).
India is a Parliamentary system. Hence President is a non-executive.
A non-executive president separates the representative embodiment of the permanent institutions of the state from the leader of the incumbent government. This may provide additional continuity and stability and may enable more inclusive representation. In addition, a non-executive president may act as a figure of national unity and may moderate political conflicts. Some argue that a non-executive president with little effective power is an unnecessary addition to the political system. Conversely, a non-executive president who possesses effective powers of discretionary intervention may oppose the elected government and cause a divisive power struggle.
Head of government and head of state
Parliamentary systems usually separate the functions of head of state and head of government. The head of state’s duties typically include representing the country, performing ceremonial duties as an embodiment of the authority of the state and providing civic leadership as an expression of national identity, values and aspirations. The head of state might also have limited functions as a constitutional arbiter or guardian: he or she might, for example, have some discretionary power to nominate a prime minister, to dissolve parliament, to make non-political appointments and perhaps even to veto legislation or to call a referendum. Meanwhile, the head of government (who is usually called the prime minister) is responsible for directing the administration and setting executive policy. He or she appoints and dismisses ministers, is in charge of the implementation and execution of laws and has the ability (subject to the constitution and the law) to direct the power of the state, including the civil service and the armed forces. In a parliamentary system, the head of government also leads the legislature and sets the legislative policy agenda. This includes developing and introducing new legislation in order to pursue policy objectives, and steering legislation through parliament. A parliamentary democracy may have either a hereditary monarch or elected president as head of state. Monarchies are dealt with in International IDEA Constitution-Building Primer No. 7, Constitutional Monarchs in Parliamentary Democracies.
