Chapter 1: Power-sharing
This chapter begins with two real stories — Belgium and Sri Lanka — to show how democracies handle the demands of different social groups, and then explains why power-sharing is desirable and the four forms it takes in modern democracies.
1. The Story of Belgium
Belgium is a small country in Europe (smaller than the Indian state of Haryana) with a complex ethnic composition:
- 59% (about 58%) of the population lives in the Flemish region and speaks Dutch.
- 40% live in the Wallonia region and speak French.
- 1% speak German.
- In the capital Brussels, the proportions are reversed — 80% French-speaking and 20% Dutch-speaking.
The French-speaking minority was relatively rich and powerful, which was resented by the Dutch-speaking majority who got the benefit of economic development and education much later. Tensions between the two communities were acute during the 1950s and 1960s, and Brussels presented a special problem: the Dutch-speaking people were a majority in the country but a minority in the capital.
The Belgian Model of Accommodation
Between 1970 and 1993, the Belgian leaders amended their Constitution four times to work out an arrangement that would enable everyone to live together. The main elements of this innovative — and very complicated — model are:
- The number of Dutch and French-speaking ministers shall be equal in the central government. Some special laws require the support of a majority of members from each linguistic group, so no single community can take decisions unilaterally.
- Many powers of the central government have been given to state governments of the two regions; the state governments are not subordinate to the central government.
- Brussels has a separate government in which both communities have equal representation. The French-speaking people accepted equal representation in Brussels because the Dutch-speaking community accepted equal representation in the central government.
- Apart from the central and state governments, there is a third kind of government — the community government — elected by people belonging to one language community (Dutch, French and German-speaking), no matter where they live. It has powers over cultural, educational and language-related issues.
2. The Story of Sri Lanka
Sri Lanka is an island nation with a diverse population of about two crore people:
- Sinhala-speakers: 74% (mostly Buddhists).
- Tamil-speakers: 18% — of these, 13% are Sri Lankan Tamils (natives of the country, concentrated in the north and east) and 5% are Indian Tamils (whose forefathers came from India as plantation workers during the colonial period). Most Tamils are Hindus or Muslims.
- About 7% are Christians, drawn from both communities.
Majoritarianism in Sri Lanka
Majoritarianism is the belief that the majority community should be able to rule a country in whichever way it wants, by disregarding the wishes and needs of the minority. After Sri Lanka became independent in 1948, the leaders of the Sinhala community adopted a series of majoritarian measures:
- In 1956, an Act was passed to recognise Sinhala as the only official language, disregarding Tamil.
- Governments followed preferential policies favouring Sinhala applicants for university positions and government jobs.
- A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism.
Consequences: Sri Lankan Tamils felt alienated — they felt the constitution and government policies denied them equal political rights, discriminated against them in jobs, and ignored their interests. Their demands for Tamil as an official language, regional autonomy and equal opportunities were repeatedly denied. This distrust turned into a civil war between the government and Tamil militant organisations demanding an independent Tamil Eelam. Thousands were killed, many families were forced to leave the country, and the war caused a terrible setback to the country's social, cultural and economic life. The civil war ended in 2009.
Belgium vs Sri Lanka — Comparison
| Basis | Belgium | Sri Lanka |
|---|---|---|
| Approach chosen | Accommodation — power shared with all communities | Majoritarianism — dominance of the Sinhala majority |
| Method | Four constitutional amendments (1970–1993); equal ministers, community government | 1956 Official Language Act (Sinhala only), job preferences, state fostering of Buddhism |
| Treatment of minority | French and German speakers given equal say and cultural autonomy | Tamils alienated; demands for language rights and autonomy denied |
| Result | Avoided civic strife and a possible division of the country on linguistic lines | Distrust → civil war (ended 2009); enormous loss of life and setback to the economy |
| Lesson | Power-sharing preserves unity in a diverse society | Majoritarianism can undermine the unity of the country |
3. Why is Power-sharing Desirable?
Power-sharing means the distribution of power among the organs of government, among different levels of government, and among different social groups and stakeholders, so that no single group monopolises power. Two sets of reasons make it desirable:
- Prudential reasons (based on careful calculation of consequences): power-sharing reduces 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. Imposing the will of the majority over others may look like an attractive option in the short run, but it undermines the unity of the nation in the long run — as Sri Lanka shows. Tyranny of the majority is ruinous for the minority and for the majority itself.
- Moral reasons (power-sharing is valuable in itself): 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 acquire a stake in the system through participation.
4. Forms of Power-sharing
| Form | What is shared and how | Example |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Horizontal distribution (among organs of government) | Power shared among the legislature, executive and judiciary placed at the same level; each organ checks the others — a system of checks and balances. No organ can exercise unlimited power. | Judiciary checks the executive; ministers are responsible to Parliament; judges appointed by the executive can check its functioning. |
| 2. Vertical division (among levels of government) | A general government for the entire country and governments at the provincial/regional and local levels — the federal division of power. The constitution lays down the powers of each level. | Union government, State governments and Panchayats/Municipalities in India. |
| 3. Among different social groups | Power shared among religious and linguistic groups so that minorities feel included in governance. | Community government in Belgium; reserved constituencies for SCs, STs and women in India. |
| 4. Among political parties, pressure groups and movements | In a democracy, power is contested among parties; over time it passes from one party to another. When no party wins a clear majority, parties form coalitions and share power. Pressure groups and movements influence decision-making. | Coalition governments; opposition parties; traders', farmers' and workers' associations influencing government committees. |
Exam Tip: The 3-mark favourite is "Differentiate between prudential and moral reasons for power-sharing" — remember: prudential = consequences (reduces conflict, ensures stability), moral = intrinsic value (spirit of democracy, right to be consulted). For 5 marks, be ready to write the four elements of the Belgian model or the four forms of power-sharing with one example each — always number your points. In the Belgium–Sri Lanka comparison, quote the key figures (58% Dutch / 40% French; 74% Sinhala / 18% Tamil) — precise data fetches full marks.