Power Sharing Class 10 Social Science Notes and Questions

Sinhala was recognized as the official language of Sri Lanka by passing an Act in 1956.

Sinhala

Majoritarianism

The government has power regarding culture, education and issues related to language

Majoritarianism  measures  adopted  in   Sri Lanka  are :-

1.    They declared Sinhala as an official language.

2.    They   tried    to    promote    their    religion (Buddhism).

3.    In order to gain control over Tamil speakers they changed constitution and made new constitution in their own favor.

Sinhala community

Sinhala  speaking  community   who  follow Buddhism took many majoritarianistic measures to establish supremacy over Sri Lankan Tamils

Buddhism

(d) Equal political rights to Sri Lankan Tamils.

The measures taken by Sri Lanka are :

(i)   Goverment adopted majoritarian measure to establish Sinhala Supremacy. In 1956, an Act was passed to recognise Sinhala as the only official language thus disregarding Tamil.

(ii) The  governments   followed  preferential politics that favoured Sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.

(iii) A new Constitution  stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhiusm.

(i)  Of  the  country’s  total  population,  59 percent live in the Flemish region and speak Dutch language.

(ii)  Another 40 percent people live in the Wallonia region and speak French.

(iii) Remaining one percent of the Belgians speak German.

(iv) In the capital city Brussels, 80 percent people speak French while 20 percent are Dutch speaking.

Consequences   of   majoritarian   policies adopted by Sri Lankan Government :

(i)   Tamils felt the government was not sensitive about Tamil language and culture.

(ii)  Tamils felt discriminated against in jobs and education.

(iii) Tamils felt the government was practicing religious discrimination.

(i) The Belgium leaders tried to solve the ethnic problem by respecting the feelings and interests of different communities and regions, whereas the Sri Lankan government tried to solve the problem through majoritarianism.

(ii)  Belgian leaders established a federal structure under   which  power  was  shared  between  the Union   Government   and  its  other  constituent units whereas Sri Lankan leaders adopted Unitary Government structure.

(iii) The Belgium solution helped in avoiding civic strife whereas the majoritarianism in Sri Lanka led to the civil war.

It  is  true  that  forced  integration  of communities  very often bring in a lot of feelings of grudge and disagreement among the regions. This has been seen in Sri Lanka between the Sinhalese and Tamils.

The problem arises during integration of two regions in division of power and sharing of resources. Each side is afraid that the other party or region will dominate over their region. They are afraid of going backwards. And, in today’s world no one wants to be pushed aside by others. An important example is the breakdown of erstwhile USSR into different countries of East Europe.

That is why integration should be on a harmonious, cordial and amical terms and not by force.

The main elements of the Belgium model of power-sharing includes :

(i)   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 majority of members from each linguistic group. Thus no single community can make decisions unilaterally.

(ii)  Many  powers  of  the  Central  Government have been given to State Governments. The State Governments are not subordinate to the Central Government.

(iii) Brussels had a separate government in which both the communities have equal representation. The French speaking people accepted equal representation  in Brussels because the Dutch speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.

‘Majoritarianism’ is a concept which signifies a belief that the majority community  should be able to rule a country in whichever way it wants. In this type of rule they disregard the wishes and needs of the minority.

The  majoritarian   concept   has   increased   the strong  feelings of alienation  among  Sri Lankan

Tamils because of the series of majoritarian measures adopted by the democratically elected government in Sri Lanka after its independence in 1948 to establish Sinhala Supremacy.

(i)   In 1956 an Act was passed to recognize Sinhala as the only official language thus disregarding Tamil.

(ii) The  Government   followed  preferential policies that favored Sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.

(iii) A new constitution  advocated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.

Difference in power sharing of Belgium and Sri Lanka :

(i)   In Belgium,  the   government   does   not follow preferential policies in matters of jobs and education. In Sri Lanka, the government follows preferential  policies in  matters  of  government, jobs and education.

(ii)  In  Belgium, there  is a special government called  ‘Community  Government’  to  look  after the cultural, educational and language related issues. In Sri Lanka, the major political parties are not sensitive to the language and culture of the Tamils.

(iii) In Belgium, there is no discrimination between different religions. In Sri Lanka, Buddhism is the official religion.

Demands of the Sri Lankan Tamils:

(i)   Recognition of Tamil as an official language.

(ii)  Equal opportunities for Tamils in government jobs and educational institutions.

(iii) Provincial autonomy  for Tamil dominated provinces.

The Belgian leaders recognised the existence of regional and cultural diversities.

(i)   They amended their Constitution four times so  as  to  work  out  an  innovative  arrangement that would enable everyone to live together in peace and harmony, i.e., there was sharing of power between the Dutch and the French both in  the  Central  Government,  State Government and Communities Government. They followed a policy of accommodation.
This helped to avoid civic strife and division of the country on linguistic lines.

(ii)  On the other hand, the Sinhalese who were in majority in Sri Lanka as compared to the Tamils followed a policy of majoritatrianism and adopted a series of measures to establish Sinhala supremacy by passing an Act of 1956.
These measures alienated the Tamils leading to civic strife between the two communities.

The comparison between Belgium and Sri Lanka is follows:

The  main  elements  of  the  power-sharing model evolved in Belgium are :

(i)   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 majority of members from each linguistic group. Thus, no single community can make decisions unilaterally.

(ii)  Many  powers  of  the  Central  Government have been given to State Governments of the two regions of the country. The State Governments are not subordinated to the Central Government.

(iii) Brussels had a separate government in which both the communities have equal representation. The   French-speaking   people   accepted   equal representation  in Brussels because the Dutch- speaking community has accepted equal representation in the Central Government.

(iv) Apart  from  the  central  and  the  state government, there is a third kind of government called the Community Government.

(v)  This Community government is elected by people  belonging  to  one  language  community such as – Dutch, French and German speaking. This government has the power regarding cultural, educational and language related issues.

Power sharing helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between different social groups. A social conflict often leads to violence and political instability power sharing helps to ensure the stability of political order.

A homogeneous society shares a common language, ethnicity and culture. Japan and South Korea are examples of homogeneous societies.

Brussels

(a) Assertion   of   social   diversity   in   a democracy can be seen as very healthy and normal. Here each social class expresses their feelings and thoughts.

(b)  It creates a spark in other social class too to express their aspirations and demands.

(c) This allows various disadvantaged and marginal social groups to express their grievances and attract the attention of the government action.

(d)  Expressions of different social divisions in politics often results in their cancelling one other thereby reducing their intensity. This often leads to strengthening of democracy.

Social divisions indeed affect politics. Various groups raise demands and during elections vote as per their interests. Social divisions affect voting in most countries. People from one community tend to prefer some party more than others. In many countries there are parties that focus only on one community, which however, cannot  be said to be healthy.

Political expression of social diversity depends on three factors, which are as follows:

(a)   How people perceive their identities. If people see their identity in singular or exclusive term, it becomes difficult to accommodate social diversity. A majority  of Belgians now  feel that  they  are as much Belgian as they are Dutch or German- speaking. This helps them to stay together. This is how most people in our country see their identity: they think of themselves as Indian as well as belonging to a state or a language group.

(b)  How political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not  at the  cost of another  community.    In Sri Lanka, the demand  for ‘only  Sinhala’  was at the cost of the interest and identity of the Tamil community.

(c)   How the government reacts to the demands of a community. If the government accommodates the demand of a particular community in a justified way, it   makes the politics much better.

As seen in the case of Belgium. Whereas it did not happen  in Sri Lanka, if the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable demands of minority community, social divisions become less hazardous for the country. However, when the demands are suppressed the end result is very bad.

Social division takes place when some social difference overlaps with other differences.

(a)   The difference between the Blacks and Whites becomes a social division in the US because the Blacks tend to be poor, homeless and discriminated against.

(b)  In our country Dalits tend to be poor and landless. They often face discrimination and injustice. Situations of this kind produce social divisions.

(c)   Considering  the  cases of Northern  Ireland and the Netherlands. Both are predominantly Christian but divided between Catholics and Protestants. In Northern Ireland, class and religion overlap with each other. The Catholics in Northern Ireland are also more likely to be poor, and often have a history of discrimination. Whereas in the Netherlands, class and religion tend to cut across each other. Catholics and Protestants are about equally likely to be poor or rich. The result is that Catholics and  Protestants  have had  conflicts in Northern Ireland, while they do not do so in the Netherlands. Overlapping social differences create possibilities of deep social divisions and tensions.

The first reason is power sharing helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups.

Power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order as social conflict often leads to violence and political instability.

Imposing the will of the majority community over others may look like an attractive option  in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.

Tyranny of the majority is not only oppressive for the minority but it also brings ruin to the majority.

Another important  reason is that  the very spirit of  democracy  is  power  sharing.  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.

Every expression of social division in politics does not lead to disasters but it is beneficial too.

In a democracy, political expression of social divisions is very normal and can be healthy. In the cases of India, and Belgium it has been  observed that social diversities can be accommodated in a very positive manner.

But a positive attitude towards diversity and a willingness to accommodate it do not come about easily.

(i)   People who feel marginalized, deprived and discriminated have to fight against the injustices.

(ii)  Such  a  fight  often  takes  the  democratic path  voicing their  demands  in  a  peaceful and constitutional manner.

(iii) Seeking a fair position through elections.

(iv) Sometimes social differences can take the form of unacceptable level of social inequality and injustice. The struggle against such inequalities sometimes takes the path of violence and defiance of state power. However, history shows that democracy is the best way to fight for recognition and also to accommodate diversity.

(iv) Relations  between  Tamils  and  Sinhalese became strained.

Power sharing keeps up with the ‘Spirit’ of Democracy as :

(i)   Power sharing ensures that all people have stake in government.

(ii) Power sharing ensures maximum participation. It upholds the concept of people’s rule. It always brings better outcomes in democracy. It ensures political stability in a democracy.

(iii) Power sharing accommodates diverse groups. It helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups.

Power sharing is desirable in democracy because :

(i)   Prudential reasons :

(a)   It helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. Since social conflict often leads to violence and political instability.

(b)  It is a good way to  ensure  the stability of political order.

(c)   Imposing the will of over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.

(ii)  Moral reasons  :

(a)   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 effect.

(b)  People have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed.

(c)   A legitimate government is one where citizens through participation, acquire a stake in the system.

(i)  When the power does not rest with any one organ of the state rather it is shared among legislature, executive and judiciary it is called power sharing.

(ii)  Power sharing is important  in a democracy because :

(a)   It helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups.

(b)  It is the very spirit of democracy.

(c)   It is a good way to ensure the stability of the political order.

(i)  It is easy to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community.

(ii)  The demand for only the Sinhala community in Sri Lanka was at the cost of interest and identity of Tamil community.

(iii) In  Yugoslavia, the  leaders of  the  different ethnic communities presented their demands in such a way that these could not be accommodated within a single country.

The first reason is power sharing helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups.

Power sharing is a good way to ensure the stability of political order as social conflict often leads to violence and political instability.

Imposing the will of the majority community over others may look like an attractive option  in the short run, but in the long run it undermines the unity of the nation.

Tyranny of the majority is not only oppressive for the minority but it also brings ruin to the majority.

Another important  reason is that  the very spirit of  democracy  is  power  sharing.  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.

The system of checks and balances ensures that no one branch of the national government gains too much power.

Power sharing is a system of governance where all the communities in the society participate in the policy making.

When one arm of the government can question the functioning of other arms in horizontal power distribution.

Power sharing helps in reducing the conflict between  various  social  groups.  Hence,  power sharing is necessary for maintaining social harmony and peace.

The three factors that are crucial  in deciding the outcome of politics of social division are :

(a) People’s perception  :  This is the most important factor which decides the outcome of politics of social divisions. If people see their identities in singular and exclusive terms, it can lead to social divisions and violence.  It is much easier if the people see that their identities are multiple and are complementary with the national identity. A majority of Belgians now feel that they are as much Belgian nationalist or citizens as they are Dutch or German speaking. This feeling binds them together. Similarly in India; though – India is a multi-cultural country, but the feeling of nationalism binds us together.

(b)  Raising of demands by political leaders : The outcome of politics of social division also depends on how political leaders raise the demands of any community. It is easier to accommodate demands that are within the constitutional framework and are not at the cost of another community. The Sinhalese leaders of Sri Lanka wanted to fulfil their demand at the cost of other communities, and this led to the civil war.

(c)   Reaction of Government: The outcome also depends on how the government reacts to the demands of different groups. If the rulers are willing to share power and accommodate the reasonable  demands   of  minority   community, social divisions become less threatening  for the country. But if they try to suppress such a demand with force and in the name of national unity, this can lead to civil war or division of country, and that is what happened in Sri Lanka.

Vertical division  of  power :  Vertical division of power means sharing of power among governments at different levels.

In India, there are three levels of the government :

(i)   For the entire country : Central Government/Union Government.

(ii) At the provincial level : State Governments.

(iii) At the local level (i.e., rural and urban) : Local self governments  like panchayats and  municipal councils.

Power is shared between different organs of the government such as Legislature, Executive and Judiciary. This system of power sharing is referred to as a system of ‘checks and balances’ because :

(i)   All three organs are placed at the same level of power.

(ii)  The power distribution ensures that no organ enjoys unlimited powers.

(iii) Each organ exercises a check on the other. Thus there is a balance of power.

In modern  democracies, power sharing can take the following forms:

1.    Organs of Government:   In   democracy, power is shared among Legislature, Executive and Judiciary. This is known as distribution of power, it allows different organs of government  placed at the same level to exercise different powers. No organ can exercise unlimited power as each organ checks the others.

2.    Governments at different levels: In federal form of government, power is shared between the central and state governments. In India there is another lower level of government, the-local self government. This is called vertical division of government.

3.    Social Groups: Power may also be shared among different social groups such as religious and linguistic groups.

The idea of power sharing has emerged contrary to the notions of undivided political power. Earlier it was  believed that all powers of a government must reside in one person or group located at one place. It was felt that if the power to decide was dispersed, it would not be possible to take quick decisions and to enforce them. But these notions have changed with the emergence of democracy.

We have learnt that power sharing actually empowers individuals and communities. The two important reasons for sharing power are as follows:

1.    Prudential reason :  Power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups. We know that social conflict often leads to violence and political instability. Thus  power sharing can ensure the stability of political order.  Imposing the will of majority community over others  undermines the unity of the nation.

2.    Moral reason :  Power sharing  is the  very spirit of democracy. It must involve sharing of 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. This can only be achieved when the citizens have a stake in the system.

For example in India people    elect their representative through direct franchise. After that, people’s  representatives elect the government  to make or amend rules & regulations and to carry out day to day functioning of governance. In India we have a central government, a state government and a local government (panchayat or municipalities)

Forms of Power Sharing  :

1.    Horizontal Power sharing : Power is shared among  different arms  of the  government,  such as the  legislature, executive and  judiciary. This ensures that none of the arms of the government has unlimited power. Each organ acts as a check for the  others. This leads to a balance of power among various institutions.

For example, though  ministers and government officials exercise power, they are responsible to the Parliament or State Assemblies. Similarly, although judges are appointed  by the executive, they can check the functioning  of executive or laws made by the legislatures. This arrangement is called a system of checks and balances.

2.    Vertical  Power  sharing  :   Power  sharing among governments at different levels –

A government for the entire country is called‘Central or Union or Federal  government’. The government  in a particular  state is called ‘State government’ in India. In such cases the constitution clearly lays down the powers of different levels of government.

This is what was done in Belgium but not done in Sri Lanka. This is called federal division of power.

3.    Empowering   Social groups :  Power may also be shared among different social groups such as the religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community government’ in Belgium is a good example of this arrangement. I System of ‘reserved constituencies’ in assemblies and the parliament of our country is an example of empowering minority community.

4.    Political parties and Pressure groups : Power sharing is also  seen in the way political parties, pressure  groups  and  social movements  control or influence those in power. In a democracy acquiring power  can take the form of competition among different parties. 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. This kind of sharing can be direct as in a coalition government when two or more parties form an alliance to contest elections.

In  a  democracy,  we find  interest  groups  such as those of traders, businessmen, industrialists, farmers and industrial workers. They also will have a share in governmental power, either through participation in governmental committees or bringing influence on the decision-making process.