This recommendation is unanimous, but two of us, while arriving at the same conclusion, approached the question from a different angle which they have explained in a separate note.
12. Method of election to the office of President. -Coming, now, to the method of Presidential election, we find that opinions with regard thereto have been expressed differently. A substantial section is in favor of indirect election of the President through an electoral college. Another section which is no less substantial, favors direct election. It appears that all the arguments in favor of direct election and against the indirect method in the case of election of Assembly members, with the exception of one. apply in the case of President's election with equal force. The exception is that the Presidential electors, on account of their huge number and the fact of their remaining scattered throughout the country, cannot perhaps be corrupted like the secondary electors of Assembly members. Moreover, the Presidential candidates who are expected to be men of high stature and integrity are unlikely to resort to corruption. This, of course a redeeming feature in favor of indirect election of the President. But there are more important reasons in support of direct election for the office of President, besides the other general reasons in favor of direct election and against the indirect system. The President's position under the Constitutions is exalted. As the Head of the State and its Chief Executive, he has very wide powers and has to bear tremendous responsibilities in the governance and administration of the country. He and his Council of Ministers are not responsible to the National Assembly and the Ministers hold office during his pleasure. He has unfettered power to dissolve that Assembly. The dissolution of a Provincial Assembly is subject to his concurrence. The President can refuse to give assent to a Bill even if it is passed by the votes of two-thirds of the total number of members of the National Assembly and refer it to the electorate by way of referendum for a decision whether the Bill so passed should or should not be assented to. The provisions with regard to his removal from office, are so rigid that it may be indeed very difficult to apply them. Such being the unique position and powers of the president, it is necessary that he Should command the confidence of the people, and such confidence is not likely to be forthcoming except through a direct election. In the direct system, all adults shall have the satisfaction of participation in the president's election and are therefore, expected to hold elected President in very high esteem and acknowledge him as their foremost national leader which consciousness in the masses is so essential for the proper functioning of a strong presidential form of government. It cannot be gainsaid that the National Assembly is a comparatively weak representative body. If the members of this week Assembly according to the great mass of evidence received by the Commission, are to be elected direct by the votes of all adults, it is all the more desirable that the President who occupies a unique position and possesses wide powers should be similarly elected. Therefore, in the case of election of the President no less than in that of election of members of Assemblies, direct election on the basis of universal adult suffrage is the more appropriate method. This opinion is not however, shared by two of us who, for reasons recorded in their separate note, favor indirect election.
