Is India really a democracy?

Freedom was gained at midnight. But the events that followed were to decide the fate of all Indians and India for the next six decades were never mentioned even in today's significant events.

I am remembered of the saying by right Hon'ble Srinivasa Sastry: "If there were to be no India there would not have been a British Empire". Meaning the being of India was crucial. The significant event which turned the clock was the constitution - a democracy which was labelled as republic socialist and what not in the Preamble. We the people give to ourselves this constitution, read the preamble.

This was not true as I understood thirty and five years later in Iran where soon after the Shah's departure the Islamic forces conducted a referendum for an Islamic republic and later followed by an approval of the constitution by the people. If Iranians wrote "We the people" that would have been right.

But what made the Indians not submit it to public approval? After the approval of the constitution by Parliament - which was elected during the British empire - this was hailed as one of the most significant events. How can this be? Think about this. Can this imposed democracy be a real democracy and does the constitution have the sanctity? Then there was the tussle between different wings the judiciary the legislative and the executive and now all three have been supereced by the AICC president.

(Dr G Srinivasan is a doctor based in Bangalore)