Social Science (087) — AI-generated practice question

In a federal system, power is divided between a central authority and constituent units (states/regions), with each level enjoying constitutionally guaranteed jurisdiction. Neither level can unilaterally take away the other's powers.

In a unitary system, sub-units are subordinate to the central government, which can pass orders to them or even withdraw their powers.

This difference is significant because regional governments in a federal system have constitutional protection for their autonomy — as seen when Belgium shifted to federalism in 1993, making regional powers independent of the centre. In a unitary system like Sri Lanka, Tamil leaders lack such guaranteed autonomy, fuelling demands for federalism.

Source: Democratic Politics II, Chapter 2 — What is federalism?

---

• Examiners expect: (1) clear definition of both systems, (2) the key contrast — constitutional guarantee vs. subordination, (3) why this matters for regional autonomy, linked to Belgium/Sri Lanka examples.
• The phrase "constitutionally guaranteed" is critical — it's the core distinction the textbook emphasises.
• Don't write a long essay; 3 marks = ~3 distinct, tight points. Use the Belgium 1993 shift as your concrete example.