Presentation_power_sharing_1509828710_218365.pptx

D E M O C R AT I C P O L I T I C S CLASS X

CHAPTER1

POWER SHARING

OVERVIEW • This chapter emphasizes on importance of Power Sharing, i.e. sharing of power of decision makings, policy makings etc., between different authorities, in Democratic system of Governance. • Various types of power sharing is observed in a Democratic system. • Power sharing between state governments and central government, power sharing between judiciary, legislature, and executive are examples of power sharing. • Power sharing is also observed between different linguistic groups in order to make peace between them. • In this chapter, power sharing and its importance is observed via real time examples of Sri Lanka and Beligium.

CASE OF SRI LANKA The linguistic structure of Sri Lanka, based on language is as Following

Majority :Sinhala Speaking

Minority: Tamil Speaking

Indian Tamil

Buddhists (Religion followed by majority of Sinhalas)

Christians

Hindu

Sri Lanka Tamil

Muslims

MAJORITARIANISM POLICY • Sri Lanka attained policy of Majoritarianism, i.e. the majority Sinhala speaking group made policies, that were beneficiary for development of their culture and neglected minority Tamilians. • In 1956, an Act was passed to recognise Sinhala as the only official language, thus disregarding Tamil. • A new constitution stipulated that the state shall protect and foster Buddhism. • Sinhalas were preferred for universities and government jobs.

CONSEQUENCES • Tamils felt discrimination, opposed the policy of majoritarianism. • Conflict arose between both Tamils and Sinhala community, demand of New independent Tamil state Tamil Elam arose.

• Tamil militants group were formed, for example LTTE( Liberation Tigers of Tamil Elam). • This was followed by civil war. • This conflict caused loss of lives, properties. • It created hindrance in development of Sri Lanka.

• . Many families were forced to leave the country as refugees and many more lost their livelihoods.

CASE OF BELIGIUM Ethnic Composition of Belgium Dutch: 59% Flemith Region

French: 40% Wallonia Region Comparatively lesser in number but richest community

Germen: 1%

Ethnic Composition of Brussels: Capital City of Belgium

Dutch 20%

French 80%

French Minority were richer community. The Dutch was larger in number. There was conflict between two communities in 1950-60s. The problem was more acute in Capital as French were in majority in Capital but minority in country.

ACCOMMODATION POLICY • The path taken by Belgium was different from Sri Lankan Majoritarian Policy.

• Between 1970 and 1993, they amended their constitution four times so as to work out an arrangement that would enable everyone to live together within the same country. • A power Sharing Arrangement was established for establishment of peace in the country. • 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.

• No single community can make decisions unilaterally. • Many powers of the central government have been given to state governments of the two regions of the country. The state governments are not subordinate to the Central Government. • Brussels has 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. • Apart from the Central and the State Government, 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 languagerelated issues.

CONSEQUENCES • A Complicated Constitution was framed.

• Peace was established between all linguist groups of Belgium, leading stability and a path opened for development of Country. • A potential division of country was avoided. • When many countries of Europe came together to form the European

• Union, Brussels was chosen as its headquarters.

COMPARING BOTH CASES • Majoritarian Policy in Sri Lanka led to conflict while accommodation Policy led to peace in Belgium. • Majoritarian Policy in Sri Lanka led to demand of separate state for a particular linguistic group while accommodation policy made all linguistic community to leave together in same country. • Political instability was their in Sri Lanka, but despite of complex constitution Political stability was obtained in Belgium. • Development was hindered in Sri Lanka, While Belgium became one of the important places in Europe and get HQ of European Union.

• BY these two examples, it can be concluded that Power Sharing is a sustainable model for Governance, stability, peace and development.

Advantages of Power Sharing

Analytical

Moral

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. •

• Reduces Social Conflict • Reduces chances of division • Political Stability • Open Path ways of development

Types of Power Sharing

Power sharing between different organs of Government: Power Sharing between legislature, executive and judiciary : Also Known as Horizontal distribution

Power Sharing between government of different levels: Federal Government: Power sharing between Central and state Governments : Power sharing of Gram Panchayat is similar example.

Power Sharing between different social Groups: Example of Belgium

Power Sharing between Political Parties, social Groups etc.