This paper summarises the debate over presidential vs. parliamentary systems and provides a brief background of regimes in Central Asia. It also describes institutional constraints of the current presidential systems and presents the case for switching to a parliamentary system before assessing the likelihood of such a change. The author argues that the institutional design of authoritarian regimes can have an impact on the dynamics of the intra-elite and elite-mass relations. As authoritarian regimes differ widely, this paper limits its scope to the Central Asian states ruled by personalist dictatorships. It argues that a parliamentary system would soften the predatory nature of the regimes and reduce the probability of violent conflicts.

To read the document click here.