I`m sorry that i write in English but that`s all because of respect for you since I can`t write perfect Finnish but I do understand Finnish, both written and spoken, so you can answer me in Finnish.
In my opinion Finns made a misjudgement in the decision to reduce the powers of the institution of the president. After all, most people in this country feel closer proximity with the presidential institution than eith the parliamentary one.
Moreover, the old constitution meant that the president was the one and only decisionmaker and therefore people knew who to blame if things went wrong.
The current system is much more complicated. It would be different if the president were reduced to a role of a figurehead but since that is not the case, the Finnish constitution leaves a lot of space for interpretation.
My point is that a country must either have a very strong president with very strong presidential powers or have a president with no power at all. The current situation pleases no-one.
In my opinion Finns made a misjudgement in the decision to reduce the powers of the institution of the president. After all, most people in this country feel closer proximity with the presidential institution than eith the parliamentary one.
Moreover, the old constitution meant that the president was the one and only decisionmaker and therefore people knew who to blame if things went wrong.
The current system is much more complicated. It would be different if the president were reduced to a role of a figurehead but since that is not the case, the Finnish constitution leaves a lot of space for interpretation.
My point is that a country must either have a very strong president with very strong presidential powers or have a president with no power at all. The current situation pleases no-one.
Vastaukset 1
Vanhimmat
nou commet