A powerpoint presentation on Power sharing in India, USA, Hungary.

2. What is Power Sharing
?

3. POWER SHARING :
Power sharing is a technique to
share the power at different
levels. It is an idea inculcated in
democracy so that the power is
not concentrated at one hand
only and that different forms can
keep a check on each other.

6. POWER SHARING
IN INDIA :

7. POWER SHARING IN INDIA :
Power Sharing among the Different Organs of Government (i.e.,
Horizontal distribution of power) In this form of power sharing, power
is assigned by the Constitution among different organs of government
such as the legislature, executive and judiciary. This type of
distribution ensures separation of powers among the organs at the
same level, so that none of the organs can exercise unlimited power.
Each organ puts a check n the others in order to maintain balance of
power under the system of checks and balances.
Power Sharing among Political Parties, Pressure Groups and Movements
In a democracy, power is also shared among different political parties,
pressure groups and movements. Democracy provides the citizens a
freedom to choose their rulers. This freedom is provided by various
political parties which contest elections to win them. Such competition
ensures that power is not always in the hand of a single person.

8. Horizontal Distribution of Power in India

9. POWER SHARING IN INDIA :
Power Sharing among Governments at Different Levels (Vertical
distribution of power sharing) In this form of power sharing, power is
shared at the different levels of government.
The overall governing body for the country is known as ‘Union
Government’ or ‘Federal Government’ and the government at the
constituent units is known as State Government. The third or lowest
level is local government, i.e., Municipalities and Panchayats (in India).
Power Sharing among Different Social Groups In a democracy
especially, in multiethnic society, power is also shared among social
groups such as religious and linguistic groups. ‘Community Government’ in
Belgium is a good example of this arrangement. There are
constitutional and legal arrangements in India whereby socially weaker
sections and women are represented in the legislatures and
administration. We have a, system of ‘reserved constituencies’ in State
Assemblies and the Parliament. This type of arrangement is meant to
give proper share in the government and administration to diverse
social groups who otherwise would feel alienated from the government.

10. Vertical distribution of power in India

12. POWER SHARING IN USA:
The first type of government in America was based primarily on
state government. Prior to the signing of the Constitution,
America had been made up of thirteen colonies, which had been
ruled by England. They feared a strong central government like
the one they lived with under England's rule. However, it was
soon discovered that this weak form of state government could
not survive and so the Constitution was drafted.
The Constitution :
•defines and limits the power of the national government
•defines the relationship between the national government and
individual state government
•guarantees the rights of the citizens of the United States.

13. POWER SHARING IN USA :
This time, it was decided that a government system based on
federalism would be established. In other words, power is
shared between the national and state (local) governments. The
opposite of this system of government is a centralized
government, such as in France and Great Britain, where the
national government maintains all power.
Sharing power between the national government and state
governments allows us to enjoy the benefits of diversity and
unity. For example, the national government may set a uniform
currency system. Could you imagine having 50 different types of
coins, each with a different value? You would need to take along
a calculator to go shopping in another state. By setting up a
national policy, the system is fair to everyone and the states do
not have to bear the heavy burden of regulating their currency.

14. POWER
SHARING IN
HUNGARY

15. The four independent branches of power in Hungary
(the parliament, the government, the court system,
and the office of the public accuser) are divided into
six bodies:
Parliament (Magyar Országgyűlés): elected every 4
years by the people in a highly complex, two-round
voting system.
Government (Magyar Kormány): installed and removed
by 50%+1 basic majority vote of the parliament, 4-
year terms.
Supreme Court (Legfelsőbb Bíróság): Chief justice
elected by qualified (2/3) majority of the parliament,
no government oversight

16. Constitutional court (Alkotmánybíróság): members
elected by qualified majority of the parliament for 8
years, this body nullifies laws and has no government
oversight.
Chief public accuser (Legfőbb ügyész): elected by
qualified majority of the parliament, 6-year terms,
office budget fixed, no government oversight.
The President of the Republic (Köztársasági Elnök) is
elected by qualified majority of the Hungarian
parliament for 5-year terms (cannot be reelected
more than once). He/she has ceremonial powers only,
signs laws into power and commands the military in
time of peace.

18. PROBLEMS IN POWER SHARING :
•Power sharing can be compatible with democracy, even though it
interferes with the option of total power offered by competitive
elections
•Power sharing agreements depend on the cooperation of
conflicting parties, which may increase the risk of excluding key
groups from the coalition
•Outside security guarantees are the best means to induce actors
in a civil conflict to sign and abide by agreements
•There is a need to offer extremists a large enough stake in the
future government: It undermines them and legitimises the larger
group
•There is a need for a reinterpretation of power sharing in terms
of what can be reasonably achieved.

20. CAUSES OF CONFLCTS :
•Elites may initiate conflict to bolster their power at the
center
•May reflect well the divisions in society but does not provide
incentives for building bridges across community lines
•May contain disincentives for contending groups to live
peacefully together
•People may be unwilling to vote for candidates who are not
from their community
•Political leaders and key public figures may not be willing to
respond to the incentives for moderation, preferring that
minority representation remain token or symbolic

22. METHODS TO RESOLVE
CONFLICTS :
•grand coalition governments in which nearly all political
parties have appointments;
•protection of minority rights for groups;
•decentralization of power;
•decision making by consensus.

24. THANKS FOR BEING A PATIENT
AUDIENCE AND WATCHING OUR
POWERPOINT PRESENTATION
..