Chapter 1: Power-sharing (Political Science)

• Horizontal distribution among different organs of government: power is shared among the legislature, executive and judiciary, each at the same level, which keeps a check on the others (a system of checks and balances). Example: in India, ministers are responsible to Parliament, and judges, though appointed by the executive, can check the working of the executive and laws made by the legislature.
• Vertical distribution among governments at different levels: a general government for the entire country and governments at the provincial or regional level (and local level). Example: in India, the Union Government, State Governments, and municipalities and panchayats. This is called a federal division of power.
• Among different social groups: religious and linguistic groups share power. Example: the community government in Belgium; in India, reserved constituencies for SCs and STs in legislatures.
• Among political parties, pressure groups and movements: competition among parties ensures that power does not remain with one group; parties may share power through coalition governments. Example: coalition governments at the Centre in India, and interest groups such as traders, farmers and industrial workers influencing decisions.

Horizontal (among legislature, executive and judiciary), vertical (among central, state and local governments), among social groups (e.g. Belgium's community government, reserved seats in India) and among political parties (e.g. coalition governments).

• Prudential reason: power sharing is good because it helps to reduce the possibility of conflict between social groups, and so ensures political stability. Example: in India, seats are reserved for SCs, STs and (in local bodies) women, so that these groups get a fair share in power and do not feel alienated.
• Moral reason: power sharing is the very spirit of democracy: people have a right to be consulted on how they are to be governed, and a legitimate government is one where citizens, through participation, acquire a stake in the system. Example: the Panchayati Raj system in India gives power to the people at the local level to decide matters that affect them.

Prudential: it reduces conflict between social groups (e.g. reserved seats for SCs, STs and women). Moral: people have a right to share power in a democracy (e.g. Panchayati Raj).

I agree with Ouseph. Power sharing is not only a way to manage social divisions or large regions; it is the very spirit of democracy. Every society, big or small, divided or not, gains from it: sharing power among the organs of government prevents misuse of power, local governments let people take decisions on local matters, and competition among parties keeps the government responsive. So power sharing is needed for both prudential and moral reasons in all democracies.

Ouseph is right: every democracy needs power sharing, both to prevent misuse of power and because people have a right to share in governance.

No. Belgium's power-sharing arrangements are based on respecting and accommodating the different linguistic communities: the Dutch, French and German speakers. The constitution provides an equal number of Dutch- and French-speaking ministers, a separate community government for cultural, educational and language matters, and special arrangements for Brussels. Banning French in schools forces one community's language on another; this is like the majoritarian approach that caused conflict in Sri Lanka, and it goes against the spirit of mutual respect on which Belgium's unity rests.

No; the ban imposes Dutch on French speakers, which goes against Belgium's spirit of accommodating all linguistic communities.

The passage says: "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."

This is a prudential reason, because it is based on the good results (less corruption, better administration) that power sharing brings. (The ideas that Panchayati Raj "establishes true democracy" and restores power "in the hands of the people" are moral reasons.)

"Giving power to Panchayats is a way to reduce corruption and increase administrative efficiency."

C, E and G are arguments against power sharing.

(a) A B D F

Statement A is wrong: in Belgium, it was the French-speaking community, rich and powerful though a minority, that was resented by the Dutch-speaking majority; the Belgian leaders recognised the existence of regional differences and cultural diversities and accommodated both.

(d) B, C and D

1 – B (separation of powers), 2 – D (federal government), 3 – A (community government), 4 – C (coalition government).

(c) B D A C

(b) Both A and B are true.