Political Institutions
What the exam is asking
Institutions questions test how executives, legislatures, judiciaries, and bureaucracies are structured and how those structures shape outcomes. Key contrasts: parliamentary vs. presidential systems, fusion vs. separation of powers, federal vs. unitary arrangements, and head of state vs. head of government.
Map the six countries. The UK fuses executive and legislature: the prime minister sits in Parliament, and a vote of no confidence can topple the government. Russia and Mexico have presidential systems, but Russia's constitution concentrates power in the presidency while Mexico's has moved toward greater pluralism. Nigeria blends a US-style president with a federal structure balancing ethno-regional interests. China concentrates authority in the Communist Party, with the National People's Congress as a rubber stamp. Iran fuses theocratic and republican elements: a Supreme Leader above an elected president and Majles, with the Guardian Council vetting candidates.
Traps
- Assuming a written constitution implies limited government - China and the USSR had constitutions that constrained little.
- Mixing up head of state (ceremonial or unifying) and head of government (operational).
- Treating federalism as mere decentralization; federalism constitutionally protects subunits.
- Forgetting judicial review varies: strong in Mexico and Nigeria, weak in China and constrained in Iran.
Rule of thumb
For any institution question, ask: who selects this body, who can remove it, and what can it veto? Those three powers explain most institutional behavior.
Worked example
Question: Why can a UK prime minister be removed mid-term? Because the executive depends on parliamentary confidence; losing a confidence vote or party leadership forces resignation - unlike a US-style president fixed for a term.