I have a simple equation in mind. Sharing power = dividing power = weakening the country. Why do we start by talking of this?
Answer
Division of power does not weaken the country. It makes the country stronger by avoiding the concentrated powers in few hands that can prove harmful for the country. It creates possibility of better decisions by considering diverse perspectives. It helps reduce conflicts between different social groups, making the country more stable and powerful.
Look at the maps of Belgium and Sri Lanka. In which region, do you find concentration of different communities?
Answer
Belgium — There are two major linguistic groups in Belgium, (1) French speaking people and (2) Dutch speaking people. Most of the French speaking people live in the Wallonia (Northern) region and constitute 40 per cent of total population while Dutch speaking people (59%) live in the Flemish (Southern) region. The German speaking people live in the eastern Belgium and constitute 1% of population. In the capital city Brussels, 80 per cent people speak French while 20 per cent are Dutch-speaking.
Sri Lanka — The major social groups are the Sinhala-speakers (74 per cent) and the Tamil-speakers (18 per cent). Among Tamils there are two sub-groups. Tamil natives of the country are called 'Sri Lankan tamils'(13%) and Indian Tamils (5%). Sri Lankan Tamils are concentrated in the north and east of the country. Sinhalese live throughout the country. Indian Tamils are concentrated in the northern, central and southern regions. Muslims have sporadic distribution throughout the country.
What's wrong if the majority community rules? If Sinhalas don't rule in Sri Lanka, where else will they rule?
Answer
A country is ruled by majority of opinions and not majority of any community. All rights and rule-regulation must be same for all the communities or religions. All communities should get equal opportunity of representation in the government.
What kind of a solution is this? I am glad our Constitution does not say which minister will come from which community.
Answer
We are a secular country. It refers to the separation of government institutions and representatives from religious institutions. But the Belgium constitution prescribes that the number of Dutch and French-speaking ministers shall be equal in the central government.
So you are saying that sharing of power makes us more powerful. Sounds odd! Let me think.
Answer
Sharing power in a democracy can indeed strengthen the country in several ways:
- Conflict Reduction — When power is shared among different groups, it reduces the likelihood of social conflict. Cooperation and compromise become essential, leading to stability and unity.
- Democratic Spirit — Power-sharing embodies the essence of democracy by ensuring that various voices are heard. It prevents the concentration of power in a single entity, promoting fairness and inclusivity.
- Stability — By balancing power distribution, power-sharing maintains political stability. It prevents domination by any one group, fostering a harmonious environment.
Read the given story carefully and answer the question that follows:
“In the city of Beirut, there lived a man called Khalil. His parents came from different communities. His father was an Orthodox Christian and mother a Sunni Muslim. This was not so uncommon in this modern, cosmopolitan city. People from various communities that lived in Lebanon came to live in its capital, Beirut. They lived together, intermingled, yet fought a bitter civil war among themselves. One of Khalil’s uncles was killed in that war.
At the end of this civil war, Lebanon’s leaders came together and agreed to some basic rules for power sharing among different communities. As per these rules, the country’s President must belong to the Maronite sect of Catholic Christians. The Prime Minister must be from the Sunni Muslim community. The post of Deputy Prime Minister is fixed for Orthodox Christian sect and that of the Speaker for Shi’a Muslims. Under this pact, the Christians agreed not to seek French protection and the Muslims agreed not to seek unification with the neighbouring state of Syria. When the Christians and Muslims came to this agreement, they were nearly equal in population. Both sides have continued to respect this agreement though now the Muslims are in clear majority.
Khalil does not like this system one bit. He is a popular man with political ambition. But under the present system, the top position is out of his reach. He does not practise either his father’s or his mother’s religion and does not wish to be known by either. He cannot understand why Lebanon can’t be like any other ‘normal’ democracy. “Just hold an election, allow everyone to contest and whoever wins maximum votes becomes the president, no matter which community he comes from. Why can’t we do that, like in other democracies of the world?” he asks. His elders, who have seen the bloodshed of the civil war, tell him that the present system is the best guarantee for peace…”
If you had the power to rewrite the rules in Lebanon, what would you do? Would you adopt the ‘regular’ rules followed everywhere, as Khalil suggests? Or stick to the old rules? Or do something else?
Answer
I propose a hybrid approach for Lebanon, combining power-sharing and democratic principles. Retain the current framework for key positions (President, Prime Minister, Deputy Prime Minister, Speaker) to ensure stability and representation. Implement a democratic electoral system for other positions, promoting inclusivity and meritocracy. As Abraham Lincoln said, democracy is a government “of the people, by the people, for the people.” Introduce proportional representation in parliament to reflect Lebanon's diverse demographics, echoing Mahatma Gandhi’s belief that “Democracy is an impossible thing until the power is shared by all.” Establish a periodic review mechanism to adjust the power-sharing formula as needed. Promote policies to strengthen a civic national identity over sectarian divides, fostering a "live and let live" ethos. This approach balances stability with fairness, ensuring a more resilient and equitable political system for Lebanon.
In 2005, some new laws were made in Russia giving more powers to its president. During the same time the US president visited Russia. What according to this cartoon, is the relationship between democracy and concentration of power? Can you think of some other examples to illustrate the point being made here?
Answer
Democracy is a system of government where the citizens of a state exercise power to rule the state, either directly or through elected representatives. In the given cartoon, the horse pulling the cart represents the democracy. The cartoon clearly imparts that the people suffer when there is concentration of power. The government behaves like an autocracy and the say of people decreases considerably. For example, Pakistan is a democratic country but the government often works like an autocracy.
In my school, the class monitors changes every month. Is that what you call a power sharing arrangement?
Answer
Changing of class monitor every month cannot be called a power sharing arrangement because their is no arrangements for checking his actions. But if there are 2 or 3 monitors for different works, it can depict power sharing as none of them can work independently in an autocratic way.
Annette studies in a Dutch medium school in the northern region of Belgium. Many French-speaking students in her school want the medium of instruction to be French. Selvi studies in a school in the northern region of Sri Lanka. All the students in her school are Tamil speaking and they want the medium of instruction to be Tamil. If the parents of Annette and Selvi were to approach respective governments to realize the desire of the child who is more likely to succeed? And why?
Answer
Parents of Annette are likely to succeed because the Belgian government believes in power sharing. Therefore, it is most likely that request of parents of Annette will be heard. The Sri Lankan government is run by Sinhala majority. Tamil representatives are not a part of their government. Therefore, there are least chances that Selvi's parents will be heard.
Here are some examples of power sharing. Which of the four types of power sharing do these represent? Who is sharing power with whom?
- The Bombay High Court ordered the Maharashtra State Government to immediately take action and improve living conditions for the 2,000-odd children at seven children’s homes in Mumbai.
- The government of Ontario state in Canada has agreed to a land claim settlement with the aboriginal community. The Minister responsible for Native Affairs announced that the government will work with aboriginal people in a spirit of mutual respect and cooperation.
- Russia’s two influential political parties, the Union of Right Forces and the Liberal Yabloko Movement, agreed to unite their organisations into a strong rightwing coalition. They propose to have a common list of candidates in the next parliamentary elections.
- The finance ministers of various states in Nigeria got together and demanded that the federal government declare its sources of income. They also wanted to know the formula by which the revenue is distributed to various State Governments.
Answer
- The Bombay High Court ordered the Maharashtra state government to immediately take action and improve living conditions for the 2,000-odd children at seven children’s homes in Mumbai — This is an example of power sharing among different organs of the government. Here the power is shared between the judiciary and the executive.
- The government of Ontario state in Canada has agreed to a land claim settlement with the aboriginal community. The minister responsible for Native Affairs announced that the government will work with aboriginal people in a spirit of mutual respect and cooperation. — This is an example of sharing of power among different social groups. Here, the power is shared between the aboriginals and other social groups.
- Russia’s two influential political parties, the Union of Right Forces (SPS) and the liberal Yabloko movement agreed to unite their organizations into a strong right- wing coalition. They propose to have a common list of candidates in the next parliamentary elections. — Political parties pressure groups and movements control or influence power. Here, the power is being shared between SPS and the liberal Yabloko movement. This is an example of power sharing arrangements forming a coalition government.
- The finance ministers of various states in Nigeria got together and demanded that the federal government should declare its sources of income. They also wanted to known the formula by which the revenue is distributed to various state governments. — This is an example of power sharing among governments at different levels. Here, the power is being shared between federal and state governments.
What are the different forms of power sharing in modern democracies? Give an example of each of these.
Answer
In modern democracies, power sharing takes various forms to ensure a balanced and inclusive system. Here are the different forms of power sharing:
- Horizontal Distribution of Power — This involves sharing power among different organs of government, such as the legislature, executive, and judiciary. For example, in India, the Parliament enacts laws (legislature), the executive implements them, and the judiciary checks their functioning.
- Vertical Distribution of Power — Power is shared between different levels of government (central and regional). For example, India has a Union Government (central) and State Governments (regional) that share power.
- Power Sharing Between Different Social Groups — It enhances participation in democratic systems by sharing power among diverse social groups. For example, 'Community Government' in Belgium shows sharing of power between different social groups.
- Power Sharing Between Political Parties, Pressure Groups, and Movements — When two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections, they directly engage in power sharing. If their alliance wins the elections, they form a coalition government, resulting in shared power. For example, National Democratic Alliance (NDA) is an Indian political alliance. Beyond political parties, interest groups (such as industrial workers, farmers, and business associations) also influence those in power.
State one prudential reason and one moral reason for power sharing with an example from the Indian context.
Answer
- Prudential reason — The power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instability, power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order. Example: we have reservation of seats in legislatures for scheduled castes (SC) and scheduled tribes (ST), allowing these marginalized sections to participate in governance.
- Moral reason — Power sharing is the very spirit of democracy. 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. A legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system. Example: In India, citizens engage in debates, criticism, and pressure the government to reconsider policies and decisions.
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
I agree with Ouseph. Every society needs some form of power sharing even if it is small or does not have social divisions. It is because even in a seemingly homogeneous society, differing opinions and interests exist. Power-sharing helps maintain social harmony by reducing conflicts among individuals. Also, a democratic society allows its members to participate and acquire a stake in the system. Power-sharing generates a sense of belongingness, making people feel connected to their community and nation and it keeps a check on how power is exercised, preventing its concentration in a few hands and misuse.
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 in 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
No, this measure is not in keeping with the spirit of Belgium’s power sharing arrangements. These arrangements aim to maintain peace between the French-speaking and Dutch-speaking communities without offending any of them. By banning French, the mayor risks causing civil unrest. Accepting both languages in the town’s schools through bilingual education would be a better way to integrate the people of the town, avoid clash amd maintain peace.
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
"Increase in administrative efficiency" and "Reduction in corruption" are the two prudential reasons for power sharing offered in the given paragraph related to Panchayati Raj.
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 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
The arguments in favor of power sharing are:
A. Reduces conflict among different communities.
B. Decreases the possibility of arbitrariness.
D. Accommodates diversities.
F. Promotes people’s participation in government.
Therefore, the correct answer is (a) A, B, D, F.
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 unitary government to a federal one prevented a possible division of the country on linguistic lines.
Which of the statements given above are 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
Statement A is incorrect because, in Belgium, there were efforts to accommodate the interests of different linguistic communities rather than imposing the dominance of the Dutch-speaking majority on the French-speaking minority.
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:
| S.No. | 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 |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| a | D | A | B | C |
| b | B | C | D | A |
| c | B | D | A | C |
| d | C | D | A | B |
Answer
(c) B, D, A, C
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 is true but B is false
- Both A and B are true
- Both A and B are false
- A is false but B is true
Answer
Both A and B are true
Power sharing is indeed beneficial for democracy because it ensures inclusivity, representation, and accountability. By allowing different social groups to participate in decision-making, power sharing reduces the likelihood of conflicts.