What is the basic difference between the Sri Lankan and the Turkish system of the presidency?

For instance, The Sri Lankan president lost the majority in the parliament. As a result, the political parties are demanding his resignation.

Would it be the same if the Turkish president loses the majority in the parliament?

What are the other differences?

1 Answer 1


The systems are somewhat similar, with a powerful directly elected President and a separate legislature.

The Sri Lankan system has a Prime Minister, the head of the leading party in Parliament and a cabinet, chosen from Parliament by the President. The President is a member of the cabinet and leads it.

The Turkish system has a legislature that is separated from the executive. The President chooses ministers from outside Parliament. There is no Prime Minister and the President can choose their own deputy.

There are inumerable other small differences, and significant differences in political culture, which are not codified in the constitution, as you would expect from two countries with such different histories and cultures.

As both legislatures use a modified PR system, it is quite likely that the President's party won't hold a majority - Under PR it is common that no party can reach a majority. Perhaps there would be calls for resignation, but it is common for opposition parties to call for resignation. But in neither Sri Lanka, nor in Turkey, can Parliament demand the resignation of the President, except by impeachment proceedings.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .