Opinion | The question of a directly elected executive
Summary
The article debates the merits of Nepal having a directly elected executive versus a parliament-elected one, analyzing corruption indices and governance stability in various countries, concluding that a directly elected executive is not a guaranteed solution for Nepal's political challenges.
Key Points
- Nepal currently has an executive elected by Parliament, while debate exists over adopting a directly elected executive.
- Countries with executives elected by Parliament generally show lower corruption scores and better economic performance than those with directly elected executives.
- Coalition governments are not inherently unstable; countries like Germany and India have prospered under them.
- Nepal’s political instability stems from leaders' lack of accountability and party internal democracy rather than the system of executive election.
