Power Sharing - notes
Story of Belgium
Belgium is a small country in Europe with a population of over 1 crore, about half the population of
Haryana. Of the country’s total population, 59% speak the Dutch language, 40% of people speak French,
and the remaining 1% speak German. Look at the map below to know the language variation of Belgium.
The minority French-speaking community was rich and powerful, so they got the benefit of economic
development and education. This created tensions between the Dutch-speaking and French-speaking
communities during the 1950s and 1960s.
Accommodation in Belgium
In Belgium, the government handled the community difference very well. Between 1970 and 1993, Belgian
leaders amended their constitution four times and came up with a new model to run the government.
Here are some of the elements of the Belgian model.
1. The Constitution prescribes that the number of Dutch and French-speaking ministers shall be equal
in the Central Government. Some special laws require the support of the majority of members from
each linguistic group. Thus, no single community can make decisions unilaterally.
2. The state governments are not subordinate to the Central Government.
3. Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation.
4. Apart from the Central and the State Governments, there is a third kind of government. This
‘community government’ is elected by people belonging to one language community – Dutch,
French and German-speaking – no matter where they live. This government has the power regarding
cultural, educational and language-related issues.
The Belgium model was very complicated, but it helped to avoid civic strife between the two major
communities.
Story of Sri Lanka
Now, let’s take the situation of another country, Sri Lanka. It is an island nation having a population of 2
crores, about the same as Haryana. Sri Lanka has a diverse population. The major social groups are the
Sinhala speakers (74%) and the Tamil speakers (18%). Among Tamils, there are two subgroups, “Sri
Lankan Tamils” and “Indian Tamils”. You can see the map below to know the population distribution of
different communities in Sri Lanka.
In Sri Lanka, the Sinhala community enjoyed the bigger majority and imposed its will on the entire country.
Majoritarianism in Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka emerged as an independent country in 1948. The Sinhala community was in the majority, so they
formed the government. They also followed preferential policies that favoured Sinhala applicants for
university positions and government jobs. These measures taken by the government gradually increased the
feeling of alienation among the Sri Lankan Tamils. Sri Lankan Tamils felt that the Constitution and
government policies denied them equal political rights, discriminated against them in getting jobs and other
opportunities and ignored their interests. Due to this, the relationship between the Sinhala and Tamil
communities become poor. Sri Lankan Tamils launched parties and struggled for the recognition of Tamil as
an official language, for regional autonomy and for equality of opportunity in securing education and jobs.
But their demand was repeatedly denied by the government. The distrust between the two communities
turned into widespread conflict and turned into a civil war. As a result, thousands of people from both
communities have been killed. Many families were forced to leave the country as refugees, and many more
lost their livelihoods. The civil war ended in 2009 and caused a terrible setback to the social, cultural and
economic life of the country.
What have you learned from the stories of Belgium and Sri Lanka?
Both countries are democracies, but they deal differently with the concept of power-sharing.
In Belgium, the leaders have realised that the unity of the country is possible only by respecting the
feelings and interests of different communities and regions. This resulted in mutually acceptable
arrangements for sharing power.
Sri Lanka shows that if a majority community wants to force its dominance over others and refuses
to share power, it can undermine the unity of the country.
Why is power sharing desirable?
You will find the answer to this question in the points below.
1. Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups.
2. The second reason is that a democratic rule involves sharing power with those affected by its
exercise and who have to live with its effects. People have a right to be consulted on how they are to
be governed.
Let us call the first set of reasons Prudential and the second moral. The prudential reasons stress that power-
sharing will bring out better outcomes, whereas the moral reasons emphasise the act of power-sharing as
valuable.
Form of Power Sharing
Most of you must think that sharing power = dividing power = weakening the country. A similar thing was
believed in the past. It was assumed that all the power of a government must reside in one person or group of
persons located in one place. Otherwise, it would be very difficult to make quick decisions and to enforce
them. But these notions have changed with the emergence of democracy. In a democracy, people rule
themselves through institutions of self-government. Everyone has a voice in the shaping of public policies.
Therefore, in a democratic country, political power should be distributed among citizens.
In modern democracies, power sharing can take many forms, as mentioned below:
1. Power is shared among different organs of government, such as the legislature, executive and
judiciary. This is called horizontal distribution of power because it allows different organs of
government placed at the same level to exercise different powers. Such separation ensures that none
of the organs can exercise unlimited power. Each organ checks the others. This arrangement is called
a system of checks and balances.
2. Power can be shared among governments at different levels – a general government for the entire
country and governments at the provincial or regional level, which is called the federal government.
3. Power may also be shared among different social groups, such as religious and linguistic groups.
‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement. This method is used to
give minority communities a fair share of power.
4. Power sharing arrangements can also be seen in the way political parties, pressure groups and
movements control or influence those in power. When two or more parties form an alliance to
contest elections, and if they get elected, they form a coalition government and thus share power.
Textbook solutions
1. What are the different forms of power-sharing in modern democracies? Give an example of each of
these.
Answer.
There are different forms of power-sharing in modern democracies. They are given below:
a. Horizontal distribution of power – Power is shared among different organs of government, such as
the legislature, executive and judiciary. Example: India
b. The federal division of power – Power can be shared among governments at different levels – a
general government for the entire country and governments at the provincial or regional level.
Example: India (Union Government and State Governments)
c. Community government – Power may also be shared among different social groups, such as
religious and linguistic groups. Example: Belgium
d. Power-sharing between political parties, pressure groups and movements – Such competition ensures
that power does not remain in one hand. In the long run, power is shared among different political
parties that represent different ideologies and social groups.
2. State one prudential reason and one moral reason for power-sharing with an example from the
Indian context.
Answer.
While prudential reasons stress that power-sharing will bring out better outcomes. In India, the power is
shared horizontally among various organs of government. The Legislature, Executive and Judiciary are
responsible for administering India. Reservation is applicable in India, where various sections are given
benefits over others to avoid conflicts.
Moral reasons emphasise the very act of power-sharing as valuable. In India, citizens are conferred with
fundamental rights and directive principles of state policies are implied in the government.
3. After reading this chapter, three students drew different conclusions. Which of these do you agree
with and why? Give your reasons in about 50 words. Thomman – Power sharing is necessary only in
societies which have religious, linguistic or ethnic divisions. Mathayi – Power sharing is suitable only
for big countries that have regional divisions. Ouseph – Every society needs some form of power-
sharing, even if it is small or does not have social divisions.
Answer.
Ouseph’s conclusion is the right one. Every state should have some or other form of power-sharing. Power-
sharing ensures an optimum balance between different sections of society. The chances of conflict lessen,
and so does the injustice. Hence, power-sharing becomes the value of democracy. Also, power-sharing is a
good way to ensure the stability of political order
4. The Mayor of Merchtem, a town near Brussels in Belgium, has defended a ban on speaking French
in the town’s schools. He said that the ban would help all non-Dutch speakers integrate into this
Flemish town. Do you think that this measure is in keeping with the spirit of Belgium’s power-sharing
arrangements? Give your reasons in about 50 words.
Answer.
The measure of the Mayor of Merchtem to ban French-speaking in the town’s schools near Brussels is
unfair. It does not keep with Belgium’s power-sharing arrangement. Power-sharing helps maintain a balance
between different sections of society. In Belgium, there is a need to maintain the power-sharing between the
Dutch and the French to avoid civil unrest. Banning the French will promote the tendency of civil unrest. To
promote peace among different communities, the Mayor should promote a bilingual education system in the
town’s schools.
5. Read the following passage and pick out any one of the prudential reasons for power sharing
offered in this. “We need to give more power to the panchayats to realise the dream of Mahatma
Gandhi and the hopes of the makers of our Constitution. Panchayati Raj establishes true democracy.
It restores power to the only place where power belongs in a democracy – in the hands of the people.
Giving power to Panchayats is also a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency.
When people participate in the planning and implementation of developmental schemes, they would
naturally exercise greater control over these schemes. This would eliminate the corrupt middlemen.
Thus, Panchayati Raj will strengthen the foundations of our democracy.”
Answer.
The prudential reason in the given passage is – “Giving power to Panchayats is also a way to reduce
corruption and increase administrative efficiency.”
6. Different arguments are usually put forth in favour of and against power-sharing. Identify those
which are in favour of power-sharing and select the answer using the codes given below. Power-
sharing:
A. reduces conflict among different communities
B. decreases the possibility of arbitrariness
C. delays the decision-making process
D. accommodates diversities
E. increases instability and divisiveness
F. promotes people’s participation in government
G. undermines the unity of a country
(a) A B D F
(b) A C E F
(c) A B D G
(d) B C D G
Answer.
(a) A B D F
7. Consider the following statements about power-sharing arrangements in Belgium and Sri Lanka.
A. In Belgium, the Dutch-speaking majority people tried to impose their domination on the
minority French-speaking community.
B. In Sri Lanka, the policies of the government sought to ensure the dominance of the Sinhala-
speaking majority.
C. The Tamils in Sri Lanka demanded a federal arrangement of power-sharing to protect their
culture, language and equality of opportunity in education and jobs.
D. The transformation of Belgium from a unitary government to a federal one prevented a
possible division of the country on linguistic lines.
Which of the statements given above is correct?
(a) A, B, C and D
(b) A, B and D
(c) C and D
(d) B, C and D
Answer.
(d) B, C and D
8. Match List I (forms of power-sharing) with List II (forms of government) and select the correct
answer using the codes given below in the lists.
List I List II
1. Power shared among different organs of government A. Community government
2. Power shared among governments at different levels B. Separation of powers
3. Power shared by different social groups C. Coalition government
4. Power shared by two or more political parties D. Federal government
Answer.
List I List II
1. Power shared among different organs of government Separation of powers
2. Power shared among governments at different levels Federal government
3. Power shared by different social groups Community government
4. Power shared by two or more political parties Coalition government
9. Consider the following two statements on power-sharing and select the answer using the codes
given below.
A). Power-sharing is good for democracy.
B). It helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups.
Which of these statements are true and false?
(a) A is true, but B is false
(b) Both A and B are true
(c) Both A and B are false
(d) A is false, but B is true
Answer.
(b) Both A and B are true