Presidential or Parliamentary ?
 

Recently I have heard some of our Intellectuals and Column writers advocating Pakistan would be better of having a Presidential System,as they believe parliamentary system has failed in Pakistan due to presence of Regional Political Parties, The Coalition governments and the "Lota" culture in our politics.
While the counter-argument is; We already have witnessed presidential system under President Ayub Khan, Zia or Musharraf for that matter, were no less than powerful presidents. But then although they were powerful presidents yet they were not directly or fairly elected presidents; not answerable to the people. A popular and directly elected President would be more responsible and answerable to the people, resulting in giving stability to the system.
But then keeping in view the percentage of people living in provinces, most probably every President will belong to Punjab;something difficult to accept for the rest of the provinces, which already have complaints and grievances in between them.
I want to know your opinion as what do you think, is the better electoral system for Pakistan ?

no matter who elect as your President, it depends upon his or her governance as well on your country.

Presidential mean that the candidate looks or acts the way a President might be expected to look or act. While Parliamentary is a national representative body having supreme legislative powers within the state.

One thing here, systems of parliamentary government vary according to the constitutional role accorded to parliament and the electoral and party systems which determine their composition and political organization. Most parliaments face constitutional constraints.