Power-sharing

Power-sharing

Power-sharing carried 4 marks in the 2026-27 sample paper and 5 marks in each of the two 2026 board papers, but only 1 mark in 2025. Every recent paper had an MCQ or Assertion-Reason on it (Belgium, Sri Lanka, prudential reasons, forms of power sharing). The sample paper and May 2026 set a 2-marker, and February 2026 made it the case study. It has not had the 5-marker in these papers, but a long answer on it is possible.

Marks are most often lost on the Brussels figures (80 per cent French, 20 per cent Dutch), on writing that Sri Lanka's preferential policies helped the Tamils, on mixing up horizontal and vertical sharing, and on giving a moral reason when a prudential one is asked (or the other way round).

Revise in 5 Minutes

Belgium

• Dutch 59% (Flemish region), French 40% (Wallonia), German about 1%. Brussels: French 80%, Dutch 20%.
• The French-speaking minority was richer and more powerful; tension grew in the 1950s and 1960s, sharpest in Brussels.
• Four constitutional amendments, 1970-1993:

1. equal Dutch and French ministers at the Centre; some special laws need a majority of each language group
2. many powers to the regional governments, which are not under the Centre
3. Brussels: its own government with equal representation
4. community government: elected by each language group wherever its people live; handles culture, education and language

• Result: no civic strife, no split; Brussels is the EU headquarters.

Sri Lanka

• Sinhala 74%, Tamil 18% (Sri Lankan Tamils 13%, north and east; Indian Tamils, descendants of plantation workers). Most Sinhala speakers Buddhist; most Tamils Hindu or Muslim.
• Majoritarianism (the majority community rules as it wishes, ignoring the minority) after independence in 1948: 1956 Act, Sinhala the only official language; preference for Sinhala applicants in universities and jobs; the state to protect and foster Buddhism.
• Tamil demands: official language, regional autonomy, equal opportunity; by the 1980s, Tamil Eelam. Civil war, ended 2009.

Why share power

Four forms

Traps

• Brussels is 80% French, 20% Dutch.
• Sri Lanka's preferences favoured Sinhala applicants, not Tamils.
• A community government is chosen by a language group, not by a region.
• Prudential = results; moral = valuable in itself.

How to use this page: try each question on paper first, then read the answer. The marks against each step show what an examiner looks for. The 1-mark MCQs and Assertion-Reason questions are in the quiz at the end, together with questions that test how well you understand the chapter; every quiz answer comes with its explanation.

Short Answer Questions (2 and 3 Marks)

Question 1 (2 marks)

The civil war in Sri Lanka hurt both communities, not only the Tamils. Explain with two points.

Answer.

Model answer:

1. People of both communities, Sinhala and Tamil, died in their thousands.
2. Many families ran away abroad and many others lost their way of earning, so the whole country fell behind.

Marking scheme:

1. People of both communities, Sinhala and Tamil, died in their thousands. — 1 mark
2. Many families ran away abroad and many others lost their way of earning, so the whole country fell behind in its daily life and economy. — 1 mark

Question 2 (3 marks)

In the imaginary country of Tarsia, the largest community has won every election. Its government now makes three proposals:

(i) A new highway law will be passed by a majority vote in Parliament after a full debate.

(ii) Only members of the largest community may buy land in the capital.

(iii) Schools run by minority communities will lose all government grants.

For each proposal, say whether it is ordinary majority rule or majoritarianism, and give a reason.

Answer.

Model answer:

(i) Majority rule: it is decided by majority vote after debate and takes away no group's rights.

(ii) Majoritarianism: the majority community uses its power to shut other groups out.

(iii) Majoritarianism: it ignores the minorities' needs and hurts their children's education.

Marking scheme:

1. (i) Majority rule: a decision taken by majority vote after debate, which takes away no group's rights. — 1 mark
2. (ii) Majoritarianism: the majority community uses its power to shut other groups out. — 1 mark
3. (iii) Majoritarianism: it ignores the needs of the minorities and hurts their children's education. — 1 mark

Question 3 (3 marks)

Compare the social situation in Belgium and Sri Lanka on three points: the size of the majority, the nature of the minority, and where the minority lived.

Answer.

Model answer:

1. Majority: about 59 per cent Dutch speakers in Belgium; about 74 per cent Sinhala speakers in Sri Lanka.
2. Minority: Belgium's French speakers were a large (40 per cent), richer minority; Sri Lanka's Tamils were smaller (18 per cent) and split into Sri Lankan and Indian Tamils.
3. Where: French speakers mainly in Wallonia; Sri Lankan Tamils in the north and east.

Marking scheme:

1. Majority: Dutch speakers were about 59 per cent in Belgium; Sinhala speakers about 74 per cent in Sri Lanka. — 1 mark
2. Minority: Belgium's French speakers were a large minority (about 40 per cent) and the richer group; Sri Lanka's Tamils were a smaller minority (about 18 per cent), itself split into Sri Lankan Tamils and Indian Tamils. — 1 mark
3. Where: French speakers lived mainly in Wallonia; Sri Lankan Tamils lived mainly in the north and east. — 1 mark

Question 4 (2 marks)

In Belgium, some special laws need the support of a majority of the members from each language group, not just a majority of all members. Why was this rule made?

Answer.

Model answer:

1. Dutch speakers are the majority in Belgium, so with a simple majority they could pass such laws on their own.
2. With this rule, neither community can decide these matters alone; both must agree, so no group feels overruled.

Marking scheme:

1. Dutch speakers are the majority in Belgium, so with a simple majority they could pass such laws on their own. — 1 mark
2. With this rule, neither community can decide these matters alone; both must agree, so no group feels overruled. (Also accept: it stops one community from taking decisions unilaterally.) — 1 mark

Question 5 (2 marks)

For a long time, people believed that all the power of a government should be kept in one hand. Why did they think so, and how does democracy see power differently?

Answer.

Model answer:

1. They feared that if power was spread out, quick decisions and their enforcement would not be possible.
2. In a democracy, people are the source of all power, so power is shared among institutions and groups, and people govern themselves.

Marking scheme:

1. They feared that if power was spread out, it would not be possible to take quick decisions and enforce them. — 1 mark
2. In a democracy, the people are the source of all power, so power is shared among many institutions and groups, and people govern themselves. — 1 mark

Question 6 (2 marks)

Belgium's arrangement for sharing power is often called complicated. Why is it still seen as a success? Give two reasons.

Answer.

Model answer:

1. It avoided civic strife between the language communities and kept Belgium from splitting on linguistic lines.
2. The country stayed stable and united, and Brussels was chosen as the headquarters of the European Union.

Marking scheme:

1. It avoided civic strife between the language communities and kept Belgium from splitting on linguistic lines. — 1 mark
2. The country stayed stable and united; when the countries of Europe formed the European Union, Brussels was chosen as its headquarters. — 1 mark

Question 7 (3 marks)

How does sharing power make a government legitimate? Explain with three points.

Answer.

Model answer:

1. People follow laws more willingly when they had a say in making them, so they accept the government as theirs.
2. When power is shared, citizens and groups take part in decisions, so they gain a stake in the system.
3. Groups kept out of power feel the government is not theirs; sharing power keeps every group inside the system.

Marking scheme:

1. People follow laws more willingly when they have had a say in making them, so they accept the government as rightly theirs. — 1 mark
2. When power is shared, citizens and groups take part in decisions, so they gain a stake in the system. — 1 mark
3. Groups kept out of power feel that the government is not theirs; sharing power keeps every group inside the system. (Also accept as a full point: people have a right to be consulted on how they are governed.) — 1 mark

Question 8 (2 marks)

Why did the Dutch-speaking community feel insecure in Brussels, although it was the majority in Belgium as a whole?

Answer.

Model answer:

1. In Brussels, about 80 per cent of the people speak French and only 20 per cent speak Dutch.
2. So the Dutch speakers, a majority in the country, were a small minority in the capital and feared being outvoted there.

Marking scheme:

1. In Brussels, about 80 per cent of the people speak French and only about 20 per cent speak Dutch. — 1 mark
2. So the Dutch speakers, a majority in the country, were a small minority in the capital and feared being outvoted there. — 1 mark

Long Answer and Case-Based Questions

Question 9 (5 marks)

Read about one week in the imaginary Republic of Sorvania.

(a) A parliamentary committee demands the files of a failed bridge contract, and the Minister for Roads has to explain the loss to it.

(b) Parliament cuts the amount the government asked for in the roads budget.

(c) The Supreme Court strikes down a rule made by the government, because it goes against the Constitution.

(d) The Supreme Court declares part of a new law passed by Parliament invalid.

For each event, state which organ of government is checking which. Then explain why such checks do not make the government weak.

Answer.

Model answer:

(a) The legislature checks the executive: ministers must answer to Parliament.

(b) The legislature checks the executive: the government cannot spend without Parliament's approval.

(c) The judiciary checks the executive.

(d) The judiciary checks the legislature by testing its laws against the Constitution.

Why not weak: each organ still does its own work, but none can use unlimited power. This balance of power makes decisions more acceptable to the people.

Marking scheme:

1. (a) The legislature checks the executive: ministers must answer to Parliament. — 1 mark
2. (b) The legislature checks the executive: the government cannot spend without Parliament's approval. — 1 mark
3. (c) The judiciary checks the executive. — 1 mark
4. (d) The judiciary checks the legislature, by testing its laws against the Constitution. — 1 mark
5. Each organ still does its own work, but none can use unlimited power; the result is a balance of power, and decisions that survive these checks are more acceptable to people. (Accept any sound explanation.) — 1 mark

OR

Read about the imaginary State of Rupnagar.

For twelve years, one party ruled Rupnagar. At the last election it lost. No party won a majority, so three parties, one strong among the farmers of the west, one among city traders and one among the hill tribes, agreed on a common programme and formed the government together. Each partner has ministers in the cabinet, and no major decision is taken unless all three agree. The party that ruled for twelve years now leads the opposition and hopes to win the next election.

Explain five ways in which power is being shared among political parties in Rupnagar.

Answer.

Model answer:

1. Competition: power did not stay with one party for ever; after twelve years an election passed it to others.
2. Coalition: three parties share power in one government.
3. The partners stand for different social groups and regions, so these groups share power through their parties.
4. Each partner has ministers, and big decisions need all three to agree, so no party acts alone.
5. The defeated party leads the opposition and can win again, so the rulers know their power is not permanent.

Marking scheme:

1. Competition among parties: power did not stay with one party for ever; after twelve years it passed to others through an election. — 1 mark
2. Coalition government: three parties share power in one government. — 1 mark
3. The partners stand for different social groups and regions, so these groups share power through their parties. — 1 mark
4. Each partner has ministers, and major decisions need all three to agree, so no single party can act alone. — 1 mark
5. The defeated party leads the opposition and can win again, so the ruling parties know their power is not permanent. — 1 mark

Question 10 (5 marks)

The imaginary country of Varnia has two language groups. Ravi speakers are about 60 per cent of the people; Selan speakers are fewer but richer, and most people in the capital speak Selan. The government's draft plan has three measures:

(i) The national cabinet will have equal numbers of Ravi and Selan ministers.

(ii) Ravi will be the only official language, and all government exams will be in Ravi.

(iii) The capital will have its own government, with equal seats for both groups.

Judge each measure in the light of what happened in Belgium and Sri Lanka (3 marks), and suggest two changes to the measure that could cause trouble (2 marks).

Answer.

Model answer:

1. (i) is sound: Belgium's equal numbers of Dutch and French ministers at the Centre stopped either group deciding alone.
2. (ii) is risky: it copies Sri Lanka's 1956 law making Sinhala the only official language, which made the Tamils feel shut out and fed the conflict.
3. (iii) is sound: like Brussels, it protects the Ravi speakers, who are a minority in the capital.
4. Make both Ravi and Selan official languages.
5. Let candidates take government exams in either language.

Marking scheme:

1. (i) is sound: Belgium's equal numbers of Dutch and French ministers at the Centre stopped either group deciding alone. — 1 mark
2. (ii) is risky: it copies Sri Lanka's 1956 law making Sinhala the only official language, which made the Tamils feel shut out and fed the conflict. — 1 mark
3. (iii) is sound: like the separate government of Brussels, it protects the Ravi speakers, who are a minority in the capital. — 1 mark
4. Change 1: make both Ravi and Selan official languages. — 1 mark
5. Change 2: let candidates take government exams in either language. (Accept any change that treats both languages fairly, such as letting each group run its own schools.) — 1 mark

OR

Explain three measures taken by the government of Sri Lanka after independence that made the Sri Lankan Tamils feel shut out (3 marks), and two ways in which the Tamils responded (2 marks).

Answer.

Model answer:

1. In 1956 a law made Sinhala the only official language; Tamil was left out.
2. Sinhala speakers got first claim to university seats and government jobs.
3. The constitution made protecting and promoting Buddhism, the religion of most Sinhala speakers, a duty of the state.
4. Tamil parties campaigned for Tamil as an official language, self-rule in Tamil areas and fair chances in education and jobs.
5. When they kept being refused, some groups by the 1980s demanded a separate Tamil Eelam in the north and east.

Marking scheme:

1. In 1956 a law made Sinhala the only official language; Tamil was left out. — 1 mark
2. Sinhala speakers were given first claim to university seats and government jobs. — 1 mark
3. The constitution made it the state's duty to protect and promote Buddhism, the religion of most Sinhala speakers. — 1 mark
4. Tamil parties campaigned for Tamil to be an official language, for self-rule in Tamil areas and for fair chances in education and jobs. — 1 mark
5. When these demands kept being turned down, some groups began by the 1980s to demand a separate Tamil Eelam in the north and east. — 1 mark

Question 11 (4 marks)

Read the source given below and answer the questions that follow.

Onion Growers Win a Hearing

The onion growers of the imaginary State of Nirmalpur did not put up a single candidate in last year's Assembly election. Yet this March their association managed to change a government decision.

When the State government announced a new tax on vegetables sent to other States, the association organised peaceful sit-ins outside the market yards of three districts and sent a detailed note to the agriculture minister. Two of its members were then invited to join a committee that the government had set up to review farm taxes. After four meetings, the committee advised that the tax be halved for small growers, and the government accepted the advice. A traders' body and a workers' union had also sent their views to the same committee.

"We don't want to rule," said the association's president. "We want those who rule to listen to us."

(a) Name one other group in the report that tried to influence the same decision. (1 mark)

Answer.

Model answer:

The traders' body (or the workers' union).

Marking scheme:

1. The traders' body or the workers' union (either). — 1 mark

(b) Explain two ways in which the association shared power, as shown in the report. (2 marks)

Answer.

Model answer:

1. Two of its members sat on the government's committee on farm taxes and helped shape its advice.
2. Its peaceful sit-ins and its note to the minister put pressure on the government to change its decision.

Marking scheme:

1. Two of its members sat on the government's committee on farm taxes and took part in the advice it gave. — 1 mark
2. It held peaceful sit-ins and sent a note to the minister, which put pressure on the government to change its decision. — 1 mark

(c) The growers hold no office and contested no election. Why is this still a case of power sharing? (1 mark)

Answer.

Model answer:

Power is shared not only by those in office; groups that influence those in power also share it.

Marking scheme:

1. In a democracy, power is shared not only by those in office: groups that influence those in power also share it. (Also accept: it is power sharing among political parties, pressure groups and movements.) — 1 mark

Question 12 (4 marks)

Read the source given below and answer the questions that follow.

A Letter from Eastern Belgium

Dear Meera,

Thank you for your letter about your school in Pune. You asked who decides what my school teaches and in which language.

We live in a small town in the east of Belgium, near the German border. Most people in our part of the country speak French, but my family, like many of our neighbours, speaks German at home. The German speakers of Belgium have a government of their own that looks after our schools, our culture and our language. We vote for it, even though the government of our region is mostly run by French speakers. The Dutch and the French speakers have community governments of their own too. My cousin goes to a Dutch-language school in Brussels, and the Dutch-speaking community's government looks after it.

Papa says the system is complicated, but he also says that nobody in Belgium can now tell another group how to run its schools.

Write soon,
Lena

(a) Which government looks after Lena's school and the teaching of German? (1 mark)

Answer.

Model answer:

The community government of the German-speaking community.

Marking scheme:

1. The community government of the German-speaking community. — 1 mark

(b) Lena's family lives in a mainly French-speaking region. Why does that not decide which community government it votes for? (1 mark)

Answer.

Model answer:

A community government is elected by the people of one language group, no matter where they live.

Marking scheme:

1. A community government is elected by the people of one language group, no matter where they live. — 1 mark

(c) Explain with two points why this arrangement is power sharing among social groups. (2 marks)

Answer.

Model answer:

1. Each language group gets its own government with power over its culture, education and language.
2. No group can decide these matters for another, so even a tiny group like the German speakers feels secure.

Marking scheme:

1. Each language group gets its own government with power over its cultural, educational and language matters. — 1 mark
2. No group can decide these matters for another, so even a very small group, like the German speakers (about 1 per cent), feels secure. (Also accept: it reduces conflict between the communities.) — 1 mark