The contemporary classification of government forms distinguishes, basically, two main categories: The European parliamentary system and the American presidential. From the organization of each of the state powers, the relations among them and the form in which they are connected, fundamentally the executive and the legislative, it can be distinguished between one form and another.

The presidential system arises in the American Constitutionalism and is characterized for: a) the executive power is unitary, given that it concentrates the figures of head of state and head of the government; b) the president is elected by the people and not by the legislative power, which gives him a greater autonomy regarding the last one; c) the president freely appoints and removes the members of its cabinet, state secretaries or ministers; d) neither the president nor the state secretaries and ministers are politically accountable in front of the congress; e) the president, the state secretaries, ministers, and members of the cabinet cannot be members of the Congress; f) The president can be affiliated or militate in a different political party than the Congress majority, and g) the president cannot dissolve the congress nor the congress can give a censure vote to the president.

The parliamentary system comes from the political evolution of a great number of European countries, specially England’s, and is characterized by the following: a) the members of the cabinet (executive power and government) are members of the parliament as well; b) The cabinet is conformed with the heads of the parties which by coalition form the parliamentary majority; c) The executive power is divided among a head of state with representation and protocol functions, and a head of government who handles the administration and government itself; d) In the cabinet there is a person identified as the prime minister, with great political influence in the government; e) the cabinet’s subsistence is guaranteed through parliamentary majority’s support; f) the public administration is commended to the cabinet, under the parliament’s constant supervision, who can demand political accountability to the government; g) there is a permanent inter-organic control between the parliament and the government, and h) while the parliament can deny a vote of trust or can give a censure vote to the cabinet, under which the last one would be bind to resign, the government can ask the head of state to dissolve the parliament.

In addition, another form of government can be shown: the dictatorial form of government is the one in which the dictator or autocrat uses its attributions from his own authority and not by temporal delegation. It generally derives from institutional crisis in which there is a general belief that the existent powers of the government are not capable of handling the situation. It can also be originated by plebiscitary processes, or by armed movements and coup d’ etat. The first ones establish governments with charismatic leaders; the last ones establish praetorian dictatorships. The dictatorial government tries to consolidate its support by penetrating in a great part of the community’s life, through the organization of a unique party and propaganda, or through a military apparatus. Dictatorship could create a totalitarian state.

It is important to have reference of the form of government (presidential, parliamentary or dictatorial) in order to determine de viability of institutions’ and electoral processes’ legal design. This, for that representativity and functionality are guaranteed in the electoral system, as well as governability in the political one. Of course, it makes sense to face the technical aspects and the cultural, economical, political and social contexts, in regards to presidential and parliamentary forms of government.