James d. Gwartney

part of investors extremely difficult.
While there are advantages and disadvantages to all of the above types,
research suggests that Presidential systems tend to have smaller governments. This
may be due to the fact that parliamentary systems are more likely to be coalition
governments where multiple parties make demands for their constituents and
priorities in order to support the government. On the other hand, parliamentary
systems across the world seem to grow faster than Presidential ones. In post-
communist systems, however, Presidential systems seem to have an additional
disadvantage and be of larger size due to a tendency to centralize power, even to the
extent of becoming autocratic states with only a façade of democracy. An excellent
summary of the advantages and disadvantages of various forms of government
structure in the context of a post-communist country has been provided by
economists Roger Myerson, Gerard Roland, and Tymofiy Mylovanov.
(85)
Read:
A Case for Constitutional Reform in Ukraine
Roger Myerson, who won the Nobel Prize in Economics in 2007, has
elsewhere suggested a practical structure that respects the concept of checks and
balances. Given the extensive problems with corruption in transition economies, one
logical solution is to divorce responsibility for operating the government from

---

197
responsibility for investigating and prosecuting criminal activity. The former could
be vested in the Prime Minister and the latter in the President’s office. The basic
principle is that even in a long-established legal system, but especially in newly
democratizing countries, having an independent power source in charge of
investigating corrupt acts significantly reduces the ability of such actors to subvert
justice.
Shoe by Gary Brookins and Susie MacNelly (April 5, 2010)
c. An independent judiciary
While control of judicial appointments is important, it is not the only factor
that contributes to the legal system functioning as a check and balance. Economic
research has shown, over and over, that the independence of the judiciary is an
important determinant of economic prosperity. It must be clear that by
“independence” we mean real independence (de facto—or independence in fact), and
not merely what is formally written in the law but which can be avoided (de jure—or
independence in law).
(86)
Principles that contribute to such a judiciary include the
following:
i. Separation of powers. The judiciary must not have any contact with political