Compares the constitutional accommodation described across Chapters 1 and 2.
Both countries constitutionally divide power between a central government and regional governments, and neither level can unilaterally remove the other’s powers. Belgium additionally has a community government elected by language groups to handle cultural, educational and linguistic matters; India instead uses Union, State and Concurrent Lists and a third tier of local government without an equivalent nationwide language-community tier.
Grounded in the definition and comparison of federal and unitary systems.
In a federation, the Constitution divides power between two or more levels, each with independent jurisdiction, and the central government cannot unilaterally change that division. In a unitary system, subnational governments are subordinate and the centre may alter their powers. India is federal because Union and State powers are constitutionally listed and disputes are judicially resolved; Sri Lanka’s central government retains stronger unitary control over provinces.
Grounded in the decentralisation reforms.
Before 1992, local elections were often irregular and local bodies depended heavily on state governments. After the amendments, regular five-year elections became constitutionally required and State Election Commissions conduct them. Seats are reserved for Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes and at least one-third for women, while State Finance Commissions review resource sharing. Local government thus gained constitutional status and more assured representation.
Uses the chapter’s two routes to federation.
Since the United States is a coming together type of federation, all the constituent States have equal powers and States are strong vis-à-vis the federal government. But India is a holding together type of federation and some States have more power than others. In India, the Central government has more powers.
Model argument grounded in language policy and linguistic state formation.
Sangeeta’s position is best supported. India did not impose Hindi as the sole national language and allowed states to choose official languages; English continued for Union purposes alongside Hindi. Reorganising states on linguistic lines, such as creating Andhra Pradesh and later other language states, gave communities recognition within the Union rather than forcing them to secede. Accommodation reduced fear of cultural domination and made the federation more stable.
- (a). National government gives some powers to the provincial governments.
- (b). Power is distributed among the legislature, executive and judiciary.
- (c). Elected officials exercise supreme power in the government.
- (d). Governmental power is divided between different levels of government.
A constitutional vertical division of power defines federalism.
(d) Governmental power is divided between different levels of government.
- (a). State government — State List
- (b). Central government — Union List
- (c). Central and State governments — Concurrent List
- (d). Local governments — Residuary powers
Residuary powers belong to the Union government; local bodies receive powers through state legislation and constitutional schedules.
(d) Local governments — Residuary powers
- (a). A, B and C
- (b). A, C and D
- (c). A and B only
- (d). B and C only
Provincial divisions alone do not make Sri Lanka federal, and decentralisation strengthens rather than ends Indian federalism.
(c) A and B only