English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Democracies especially parliamentary democracies must ensure that public bodies and officials are performing to their full potential, providing value for money in the provision of public services, building confidence in the society, and being responsive to the community they are meant to be serving. The objective of the article is to explain and compare on the functioning parliamentary democracies, Britain, Germany, India and Ethiopia, to give an insight how the parliaments account the executive to bring better governance. Britain is the oldest parliamentary democracy; Germany with handy parliamentary democracy and functional federalism and India is the largest parliamentary democracy. These countries have much experience Ethiopia has to learn. Thus the article considered the institutional structure of accountability; parliamentary control strategies without jeopardizing the concept of separation of powers in a these four countries. The parliamentary system is portrayed under FDRE Constitution and other legislations. The article explored these laws and practical situations and tried to associate with other parliamentary democracies.

Executive Accountability in Parliamentary Democracies: A Comparative Overview: Britain, Germany, India and Ethiopia