Presidential Reform? The Outcomes Are Hard to Predict

In Europe it practically does not exist, with the exception of Belarus. Its greatest example is represented by the United States, which has always made it the cornerstone of its democracy. We are talking about presidential government, the institutional system characterized by the predominant role of the president of the republic who wields wide autonomy with respect to the legislative powers. In Italy it is one of the crusades of the current government majority, but adopting it would require an amendment to the Constitution, a very delicate issue as always. In the following interview this form of government is discussed, along with its strengths and weaknesses, with Giuseppe Franco Ferrari, Professor Emeritus of Constitutional Law in the Department of Legal Studies at Bocconi University.

What are the main features of the presidential system?
First of all, the president is elected directly by the voting public and assumes the roles of head of state and head of government. In the United States, for example, in addition to executive powers, the president also participates in the other branches of government, most importantly the judiciary by appointing judges with the approval of the Senate. In addition, the president also contributes to the exercise of legislative power by means of the veto. An elected president appoints and directs the government and remains in office for a fixed and predetermined period. He/she cannot be revoked or recalled before the end of the mandate.

The United States is one of the very few examples of the so-called advanced form of presidential government. Why hasn't it taken root elsewhere?
In reality, US-style presidential government has spread to most Latin American countries, where, however, it has very often evolved into a despotic form of government to which the term 'presidentialism' applies. In the United States, however, it has not undergone this regression.

In Europe we have some examples of semi-presidential government, France above all, but not of pure presidential government, with the exception of Belarus. Why is that?
There are several reasons. First of all, the historical ones. Take, for example, Italy and Germany, where at the time when their constitutions were drafted the memories of the totalitarian regimes that led to World War II were still alive. The same thing happened in France, where memories of the Vichy government were still present. All these examples have influenced the 'no' to a presidential form of government for fear of repeating past degeneration. In Europe, moreover, there are various countries where monarchical forms are still in force that are obviously incompatible with a presidential system. Belarus is the only European presidential republic currently in force (with the same president in office since 1994), while other Eastern countries, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union, have adopted forms of semi-presidentialism, a political system that is characterized by the direct election of the Head of State and the presence of a government, which in any case must maintain the confidence of parliament.

In Italy, a presidential reform is in the plans of the Meloni government. Could a turning point in this direction work in our country?
An American scholar said that every reform is like a gunshot in a dark room. It is difficult, if not impossible, to say a priori what it will hit. There are doctrines according to which a form of government must adapt to the country, to its historical, political and religious circumstances. On the other hand, there are schools of thought according to which a form of government can be imposed onto any situation. The important thing is that every reform be well studied, not as happened, for example, with the reform of Title V of the Italian Constitution.

The remarkable symbolic power of the presidential system is also striking.
An elected president guarantees strong representation and greater symbolic strength, though the president obviously does not govern alone. In the United States over the years the power of the president has been greatly strengthened, and consequently, to balance it, that of Congress has also been greatly strengthened. Today, a superpower like the United States has to make more decisions than before and often must make decisions that have great impact in a matter of seconds. Concentrating power in one person has advantages, such as speed in decision making, but it can also be a problem. Therefore, it must be controlled, even if this can and does create deadlocks, such as on the subject of how the federal machine should operate.

Another aspect to consider, in the event of direct election of the president, is the choice of candidates.
American scholars have found that in many countries in South America the decline of the presidential form of government into presidentialism has favored the entrance into the ring of personalities who are well-known in other fields but who have no real political experience – often with negative results.