My name is Alishan Jafri.
I am a journalist reporting on hate crimes
and the rise of extreme politics.
India is a state where calls for genocide against Muslims
are on the rise.
There is a very direct call to violence
to make India a Hindu nation.
The Prime Minister of this country should have spoken against it,
but he does not speak up.
CROWD CHANTS
The man of the moment...
..Prime Minister of India.
He is the leader of the world's biggest democracy.
Narendra Damodardas Modi.
He came to power promising a new age of prosperity...
..but his rule has been marred by religious turmoil.
ARCHIVE: There have been violent protests in opposition
to a new citizenship law which many see as discriminating
against the nation's Muslim minority.
Many in India see this law as anti-Muslim.
Massive pelting, massive pelting as of now is going on.
This series tells the story
of Narendra Modi's troubled relationship with India's Muslims.
As a young child, Mr Modi joined an organisation
which believes that this is a country of the Hindus.
Could he have done more to prevent violence
that killed hundreds of Muslims?
We were hearing that those orders to let all this happen
were coming from the top.
It is obviously a stain on his reputation.
There's no way out of that.
I'm not agreeing with your analysis.
I'm not agreeing with your information.
From where you have picked up this type of garbage, I do not know.
He was cleared of criminal conspiracy -
a finding upheld by India's highest court...
Agenda was to destroy Narendra Modi politically.
The agenda was explicitly political.
..but concerns will not go away.
Questions remained over Mr Modi's head for a long time,
and they remain over him now.
Narendra Modi has promised to build a new India,
but what does that mean for the millions of people
who belong to its largest minority?
This regime wants to disenfranchise the Muslims
and make India a "Hindu nation".
My name is Imran Dawood.
I live in Yorkshire.
My grandparents are from India. So is my father.
It was very exciting hearing the stories from family members
of what India was about,
so it was a great opportunity to do a trip at the age of 18.
With me was my two uncles, Shakil and Saeed Dawood,
and my next-door neighbour, Mohammed Aswat.
We were on our way back from the Taj Mahal.
It was a long journey.
When we actually entered the state,
I remember the driver saying, literally,
"We're home now, boys. We're home."
And then we get to a roadblock.
There was cars being stopped by people chanting Hindu chants.
They were, like, vetting them.
It was very common for people to decorate their cars' windscreens
with Arabic literature,
so straight away they'd see the owner is a Muslim.
The car in front gets through and then it's our turn.
The mob surrounded us, waving their weapons.
Suddenly, we have an attack.
We're just literally getting out of the car and running for our lives.
The first person that the mob attacked and tortured
was the driver.
Then I see Mohammed Aswat getting blows to his head.
One of the people in the mob - having a knife in his hand -
is saying to us, "Pull your pants down.
"We want to see if you've been circumcised,"
and literally feeling...
..feeling...
..feeling, "Am I going to live?"
I got stabbed, and then a police vehicle pulls up.
And then as I get in, I remember Mohammed...unconscious.
And this was before me blacking out.
This is... That's the last thing I see.
I do not know what happened to my uncles.
It's...fresh in my mind, like it happened yesterday.
But, sadly, 20 years on and nothing's happened.
There's evidence out there of what has happened
and, clearly, these people are walking free.
It feels like there's no justice there.
ARCHIVE: 57 people have died after a train carrying Hindu activists
was set alight by a group of Muslims.
The train was carrying thousands of Hindus who had visited...
The wreckage is horrific,
all the worse for being man-made and deliberate -
one of the worst acts of religious hatred India's ever seen.
In some areas, the grief and anger here
have already erupted into violence.
That's alarming news in a state where racial hatred
is deeply ingrained.
Jill McGivering, BBC News, Godhra, Gujarat.
People were saying there had been a group of people inside -
they were Hindu pilgrims, including women and children.
Somebody had either locked them in or kept them inside,
poured petrol in and set fire to them,
and a lot of people had died.
It was horrific.
People were outraged.
The perception all over Gujarat - and, in fact, all over India -
was that these Hindu pilgrims
had been targeted by the Muslim community.
The final death toll was 59.
The cause of the fire was disputed,
but at the time, Muslims were blamed.
This is in a state which has a particular history of tensions
between the Hindu majority and the Muslim minority community.
There have been a history of communal riots
and of very nasty violence between the communities.
And the concern was, something like this happens,
members of the Hindu community feel angered
that their people have been targeted,
there might be a big reaction to that.
The Chief Minister of Gujarat was Narendra Modi.
He was seen as a rising star, quite visionary -
a man who got things done,
somebody who was very pro-Hindu, a very powerful, influential figure.
I got a call from a foreign diplomat.
She was a diplomat of one of the foreign Western nations.
So she asked me, "Have you heard what had happened in Godhra?
"Do you think that this is going to escalate?"
I just used one word. I said, "Hugely."
My producer started to get information
that something was happening nearby in Ahmedabad.
It was clear from our arrival that something was very, very wrong.
As we were driving in, we were seeing plumes of thick black smoke
ahead of us in the centre of town.
There were no emergency services there. There were no police.
My memories, then, are going into the centre of Ahmedabad.
There's a quite well-known square -
there's a big area, there's an arch - and it was...
It was mostly on fire.
I remember a man who was a Hindu with his hands to his face,
watching his business - it was a travel agent's - burning.
There were also other people informing me sometimes
that the areas that were being targeted belonged to Muslims.
JILL, ARCHIVE: This is exactly what the authorities hoped
would never happen - the streets have become a battleground.
The grief and anger at yesterday's murders
has boiled over into violence, looting and religious hatred.
JILL: There was this sense of absolute lawlessness.
It was a free-for-all.
I remember seeing the police here and there, very, very disengaged.
I didn't see anybody, from what I remember,
trying to stop the setting fire to things and the looting.
JILL, ARCHIVE: On the worst day of the violence,
when murder and looting were taking place all across the city,
we saw policemen just standing by, watching what was happening
but doing nothing to try to stop it.
JILL: One of my colleagues in the team
was having quite regular phone calls with a contact of his.
It was someone, I understand, who was high up in the police force,
and they were giving information to my colleague
that they'd been told, "Let it happen.
"There will be a reaction to what happened in Godhra. Let it happen."
And we were hearing that those orders to let all this happen
were coming from the top.
Did Mr Modi do enough to stop the violence?
I think that that's something he has to answer for.
Depending on how you look at it,
he oversaw mass violence or was not able to stop it.
Questions remained over Mr Modi's head for a long time,
and they remain over him now.
REPORTER: Did the police under your command do enough to stop the riots?
Not only enough, but excellent work they have done.
Excellent work? Excellent work they have done.
Within 72 hours, we were able to control such violence.
More than 500 people dead, most of them innocent civilians,
and you're calling this "excellent work"?
I'm not happy at what happened.
But what we have done, I'm happy.
Everyone we've spoken to have said that the police
did absolutely nothing.
This is absolutely false propaganda. This is not the truth.
As questions grew around Mr Modi's actions,
attention turned to his past.
DRUMS PLAY
RSS stands for Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh -
"the Association of Indian Volunteers".
The RSS is a political organisation.
It believes that this is a country of the Hindus.
ARCHIVE: The RSS was formed in 1925 to unite Hindu society
and spread Hindu culture.
But the Boy Scout image is deceptive.
Based on principles of discipline, patriotism
and unquestioning obedience, the RSS seeks to establish
the superiority of Hindus over all other races in India.
RSS took shape in the 1920s, when, in Europe, we saw a movement
that will result in fascism in Italy, Nazism in Germany.
They liked the idea of the supremacy of the race theory,
which was created by the European fascists,
and also the idea of creating a common enemy.
For the RSS, the enemy were the Muslims.
Today, RSS is not anti-Muslim, but definitely pro-Hindu.
And they believe in the glorious past of this country
and they believe in the idea of national reconstruction.
The very core cultural values of this country,
now they are being called Hindu value system.
People can have any way of worship,
but if they believe in that value system,
they are very much part of India.
RSS always recruits children, very young boys,
because they want to tell them who they are
when they are still malleable.
To reshape the psyche of the youth is very important.
So Narendra Modi joined when he was very young.
After school, he would participate in the activities
of the young wing of the RSS. That is how he got attracted.
Gradually, he has climbed all the ladder of all the posts
of responsibility - and at a very young age.
Modi is a product of the RSS.
He has learned its politics, its lifestyle.
He made a mark for himself,
and so he was deputed to the Bharatiya Janata Party -
or the BJP - which is a political affiliated organisation of the RSS.
As the violence subsided, stories began to emerge
about what had happened to some of the victims.
In this largely Muslim neighbourhood, more than 100 people
had sought shelter in a house to escape a Hindu mob.
Imtiyaz Pathan and his family were among them.
The house belonged to a Muslim former Congress Party MP -
Ehsan Jafri.
A judge later ruled that Mr Jafri had provoked the mob
by firing his gun at it.
Imtiyaz survived by hiding upstairs.
The violence only stopped when the police eventually arrived.
When a senior police officer arrived at the house that evening,
the victims' corpses were still smouldering.
REPORTER: There are allegations that police could have done more
in Ahmedabad today.
There's always scope for improvement, I concede.
There's always scope for improvement.
I'm sure...
..we could have done better.
I think I would take it as my inadequacy, if that is to be said.
The killings would trigger a long legal battle
that made serious allegations about the police response
and Mr Modi's role in the violence.
In 2009, Imtiyaz gave evidence in court
about the alleged phone call between Mr Modi and Mr Jafri.
Mr Modi denied receiving the call
and an inquiry said there was no evidence it was made.
Imtiyaz later stood for election against Mr Modi's political party.
In Britain, the government was alarmed
by what had happened in Gujarat.
I was very worried about it.
I was taking a great deal of personal interest
because India is a really important country with whom we have relations.
We had to handle it very carefully.
What we did was to establish an inquiry
and have a team go to the Gujarat
and find out for themselves what had happened.
And they produced a very thorough report.
The report, sent as a diplomatic cable and marked "restricted",
has never been published before.
FEMALE VOICE: "Extent of violence much greater than reported."
"Widespread and systematic rape of Muslim women."
"Violence", "politically motivated."
"Aim was to purge Muslims from Hindu areas."
"Their systematic campaign of violence
"has all the hallmarks of ethnic cleansing."
This former senior diplomat was one of the investigators.
He's speaking publicly for the first time
about what the British inquiry found.
He's asked to remain anonymous.
At least 2,000 people were murdered during the violence.
The vast majority were Muslim.
We described it as a pogrom,
a deliberate and politically driven effort
targeted at the Muslim community.
The violence was widely reported to have been organised
by an extremist Hindu nationalist group - the VHP -
who have a relationship with the RSS.
"The VHP and its allies could not have inflicted so much damage
"without the climate of impunity created by the state Government."
"Narendra Modi is directly responsible."
The report contained an extraordinary claim.
"Reliable contacts have told us
"Narendra Modi met senior police officers on the 27th of February
"and ordered them not to intervene in the rioting.
"Police contacts deny this meeting happened."
There were pretty credible reports
he had specifically instructed the police not to intervene.
The police contact who we talked to consistently denied that,
so we did have conflicting reports on what his direct role had been,
but we did feel it was clear there was a culture of impunity
that created the environment for the violence to take place.
That undoubtedly came from Modi.
"While Modi remains in power, reconciliation will be impossible."
It was very shocking.
These were very serious claims that Chief Minister Modi
had played a pretty active part in pulling back the police
and in tacitly encouraging the Hindu extremists.
That was a particularly egregious example of political involvement,
really, to prevent the police from doing their job,
which was to protect both communities -
the Hindu and the Muslims.
The options open to us were fairly limited.
We were never going to break diplomatic relations with India,
but it is obviously a stain on his reputation.
There's no way out of that.
CHANTING
The European Union carried out an investigation
at around the same time.
It reportedly found that ministers took active part in the violence
and senior police officers were instructed
not to intervene in the rioting.
They looked upon this in terms of the...the suffering,
which had happened to the Muslim community,
and if you look at it in that way, you're certainly bound to come
to this conclusion that there was... It was completely one-sided,
and that there was nothing done on the part of the administration
to seriously check this, that it was a deliberate,
pre-planned, motivated assault on Muslims by mobs who were not
restrained is, to my mind, an exaggeration.
It was unstoppable for anyone.
And as a chief minister,
Modi did all the effort.
And after three days, he was able to stop with the help of police.
Modi definitely shows contrition.
He even puts in his resignation to the BJP,
but the BJP reject it.
It was quite a smart thing to do because, politically, if you offer
the resignation at that particular juncture and it is turned down,
that's the end of your resignation drama.
My name is Cedric Prakash.
I'm a Jesuit priest.
My background has been on human rights, justice and peace.
In Gujarat, human rights workers set up a citizens' tribunal,
headed by three retired judges, to investigate the violence.
Father Cedric helped them.
We wanted people from the government, officials,
to come and depose before the citizens' tribunal.
It was not easy. They were frightened.
Their careers were at stake.
On a flight to Delhi,
I happened to be seated next to a minister
of the Gujarat government.
He belonged to the BJP.
Haren Pandya was responsible for the home affairs
of the state for several years.
He just very recently relinquished office when Modi took
over as Chief Minister of the state.
He was telling me, "I know everything what was happening."
Then I said, "We have the citizens' tribunal - would you...?"
He said, "Of course I'll be willing."
He swore us to secrecy.
We tried to do everything possible in order to protect his identity
because he was big catch.
The tribunal was examining Mr Modi's role -
including the directions he had given to the police.
I think Haren Pandya wanted to explain what had transpired
on the 27th of February,
so he came to my office.
Mr Pandya told the tribunal he had attended a late night
meeting with Mr Modi and senior officials, and he claimed Mr Modi
said the police should not interfere with the Hindu reaction
to what happened at Godhra.
Mr Pandya was very clearly blaming Modi for the violence.
He felt he was responsible and he should be brought to book.
That was clear.
This was the real first indication from within the government
that there was actually a decision taken.
He is indicating that the chief minister of the state was party to
a decision where the law and agencies do not do their work,
let Muslims be attacked.
Mr Pandya wanted to remain anonymous, but news about his
evidence leaked out, and he resigned from Mr Modi's government.
Narendra Modi has said he gave categorical and clear-cut
instructions to maintain peace and communal harmony at any cost.
So was Haren Pandya lying?
Frankly, I don't know. I wasn't at the meeting,
so I don't know exactly what it is.
But a chief minister of a state cannot give a blank cheque
to people to run riot.
Last year, India's Supreme Court said Mr Pandya's claim was false.
Its findings were based on an official inquiry
which found Mr Pandya was not at the meeting.
The inquiry heard that others who were there disputed his presence
and records showed his government mobile was several miles away
at the time.
But some questioned the inquiry's credibility and thoroughness.
For most politicians, allegations like this would be devastating.
But in the midst of all the criticism,
Narendra Modi did something unexpected -
he called an election in Gujarat.
NEWS CORRESPONDENT: This election is all about one man - Narendra Modi.
To his supporters, he preaches an extreme form of Hindu nationalism,
offering hope and security against Muslim extremists.
We're just after the events of 9/11, which, in many ways,
has legitimised actions against Muslims across the globe.
This, at the very least, emboldens what the BJP are doing in Gujarat.
Mr Modi realised that there was a very strong sentiment of Hindu
victimhood, and he decided to harness that electorally.
The violence against Muslims became part of the messaging
that Narendra Modi used in the election campaign.
It is the violence and how he reacted to it that has constructed
the persona of Narendra Modi.
UNTRANSLATED
Narendra Modi doesn't tend to be very media friendly.
You follow what I say? A little bit, yes.
So for him to agree to do a sit-down interview with us
felt like a bit of a scoop.
HE CHUCKLES
He struck me as a very charismatic,
very powerful,
quite menacing figure.
So you're now coming up to elections.
This seems to me to be a state in turmoil.
We're seeing repeated violence.
We're seeing people living in fear.
What has gone wrong with this breakdown in law and order here?
I think you have to correct your information first.
The state is very, very peaceful.
So, the Muslims who would say that they are still terrified,
they are still frightened to go back to their homes... I am not...
..they still fear that the people who murdered their relatives
have not been brought to justice. What would you say to them?
I'm not agreeing with your analysis.
I'm not agreeing with your information.
This absolutely misguided information to you.
From where you have picked up this type of garbage, I do not know.
Some people have been accusing your government of not doing enough
to stop this, of not protecting Muslims even now.
These are also false propaganda made by our opponents.
And you are also a captive of this false propaganda.
Can you explain more? Who is perpetuating this false propaganda?
The information I am reporting is taken from what I have seen
with my own eyes, both at the times of the riot and now.
Those who are our opponents.
And the independent reports that have already
been published into what has happened?
They have no right to talk about the internal matter
of any government.
I'm very, very clear in my mind.
If they have done, they have done wrong.
Some would say it is a human right.
There is a general international interest.
Please don't try to preach us the human rights.
We know what the human rights are.
You British should not preach us human rights.
When you look back over the last month, you've been the leader
of this state through a very difficult period.
Do you think there's anything that you should have done differently?
Yes.
One area where I was very, very big.
And that was how to handle the media.
SHOUTING AND CHANTING
NEWSREEL: Ecstatic crowds of BJP supporters started to celebrate
the election win before it was official.
The architect of victory, Narendra Modi,
the controversial Chief Minister of Gujarat.
The more Mr Modi was attacked, the stronger he became by simply
saying that he was being targeted only because he was standing
up for the rights of Hindus.
A new repertoire had taken shape.
You polarise your vote, and you get the majority supporting you.
I just entered a taxi and suddenly I got a call
from a journalist friend of mine
and she said, "Do you know what has happened to Haren Pandya?"
She told me that he was... he was killed.
He's found dead in a car under very suspicious circumstances.
The entry point of the bullet wound is at the groin.
There is no blood lying there where there should have been blood.
There is no way from the position he was in that he could
have been killed sitting in the car.
Evidence suggests he was killed elsewhere,
his body put in the car and placed there.
The death of Haren Pandya is a mystery -
a well-kept mystery, probably.
There is, to my knowledge, no serious investigation.
The murder of Haren Pandya remains one of the big
mysteries, even today.
Mr Pandya was killed in a murder which has really not
been answered yet.
12 men were jailed in connection with his murder,
but this verdict was overturned -
the court blaming a botched investigation.
NEWSREEL: All accused in the Haren Pandya murder case
have been acquitted.
Haren Pandya was the former home minister, you might remember,
of Gujarat...
In 2019, India's Supreme Court upheld the original verdict,
but even some in Mr Modi's own party have doubts
about the investigation into Mr Pandya's death.
I knew him personally.
I think the killing of Mr Pandya was tragic and suspicious,
and the circumstances explained to me
don't make me believe in it.
I'd like to know who organised it so well.
It is not some, just a stray, say, killer or somebody taking revenge...
..but it is well-organised.
I don't think it has been properly investigated.
He was killed by terrorists who wanted to kill him
so that the blame could be apportioned to Narendra Modi.
The investigation was thorough.
It went into every stage of the Indian judicial process
and culminated in a Supreme Court judgment.
I think we should leave it at that.
In Yorkshire, the Dawood family were losing faith that the police
in Gujarat would catch the men who killed
Saeed, Shakil and Mohammed.
There were some serious doubts arising in terms of what the Indian
police were doing, because on the one hand they were saying
that they were doing everything.
On the other hand, we were seeing no results whatsoever.
In respect to the investigation,
we had no confidence in the Indian police.
It turned out that the police hadn't even done basic investigations.
They hadn't gone to the scene of the crime.
Family members went to the crime scene themselves and made
a terrible discovery.
They found burnt remains, including bone fragments, bits of teeth.
It seemed from what everybody was indicating that those remains
were Saeed and Shakil's.
The police seemed to be putting up a wall and were completely
disinterested in helping us get to the truth.
Then there was an unexpected development.
NEWSREEL: The controversial chief minister of Gujarat, Narendra Modi,
has arrived in London on a short visit.
He presides over the state where as many as 2,000 people
were killed in communal rioting...
I thought this was a great opportunity for the family
and for the victims for him to be arrested here in the UK.
The idea was that the family would go to court and seek
to prosecute Narendra Modi.
We had pages - hundreds of pages - of reports.
All of them were clear that this was a massacre.
Most importantly, that there was state collusion.
And so the chain of command went all the way to the Chief Minister.
Although the offence took place in India, it could be prosecuted
in this country.
An Indian diplomat said when news of the plan leaked, there was panic.
Mr Modi was reportedly urged to leave Britain on the next plane.
I argued in front of the judge for Narendra Modi's arrest.
The judge said, "I can see all the things that you've put
"before me, Mr Kahn, but really
"what I need is the witness statements."
The evidence that we would need to prosecute it
would have been somebody somewhere along the chain of command
saying, "Yes, there was an order
"not to take any action, allowing this to happen."
Mr Khan says that the evidence that has emerged since then -
even though it is fiercely contested - has made him
more convinced of the merits of his case.
Knowing what we now know, and the information that we now have,
if we had had that at that time, I'm pretty sure that a summons
would have been issued for Modi's arrest.
We were bitterly disappointed the judge didn't issue the warrant,
but we understood this was going to be a quite a long campaign
in terms of getting answers and getting justice and holding
people to account.
Western governments began to take action against Narendra Modi
over the Gujarat violence.
The UK imposed a diplomatic boycott and de facto travel ban.
There was essentially a travel ban imposed on Modi.
I would like to have seen much stronger action, but I think
we probably did end up doing as much as we could.
In 2005, the US government formally revoked a visa for Mr Modi
under a law that targets government officials responsible for severe
violations of religious freedom.
The US are saying this is not acceptable.
Mr Modi? Would you like to speak to the BBC, Mr Modi?
Barred from entering the United States,
barred from entering the United Kingdom.
On the international stage, it makes him somewhat of a pariah.
In 2007, a reporter went undercover in Gujarat to investigate
what had happened during the violence.
Posing as a Hindu extremist,
he secretly filmed one of the killers boasting about the role
he had played.
Babu Bajrangi was accused of leading a mob that killed around 100 people.
Mr Bajrangi made an extraordinary claim about Narendra Modi.
He said that when he was arrested for murder, several months
after the massacre, Mr Modi helped him get bail by changing the judge.
Mr Bajrangi later claimed he was reading from a script given
to him by the reporter.
Though a judge ruled the veracity of the sting was not in dispute.
In 2012, Mr Bajrangi was jailed for murder.
And he wasn't the only one who made damaging claims about Mr Modi.
Haresh Bhatt, a local BJP politician,
said he was at a political meeting addressed by Mr Modi
shortly after the train burning.
Mr Bhatt later said he told the reporter an imaginary story.
Mr Modi has said allegations against him in the recordings
are false and incorrect.
You often find that activists at the lower level...
..make claims...
..which are, in hindsight, quite preposterous.
They exaggerate their own importance.
But pressure was now building for a new investigation
into the violence.
By the beginning of 2011, Narendra Modi had run Gujarat
for nearly a decade.
Despite the controversies, some were now tipping him
for an even bigger job -
India's next Prime Minister.
Modi started to think about national politics
very early on, projecting himself as a national leader
It was already clear that he was headed
on a course which would lead him to the national state.
But Mr Modi had a problem.
SHOUTING
India's Supreme Court had ordered a wide-ranging investigation
into the Gujarat violence.
A special investigation team - or SIT - was examining the Dawood
family murders and allegations made by Ehsan Jafri's
widow that Mr Modi was part of a criminal conspiracy that led
to the disorder and killings across the state.
NEWSREEL: Modi seems to be unstoppable.
But the ghosts of the past don't leave him alone.
Grilled for nine hours on the case in 2010, the stain
on his image remains.
The mandate was to look into the possibility
that there was a criminal conspiracy by the government
led by Narendra Modi.
But the criminal conspiracy is a particular term in law
which requires a very strong standard of evidence.
For the first time in the history of independent India, a sitting
chief minister, Narendra Modi, has been questioned on the role
of his government in mass murders in connection with the post-Godhra
riots in Gujarat.
I think Mr Modi definitely was very worried.
The special investigation team was definitely a very serious
threat to Mr Modi's political career.
An important witness was the former head of police intelligence
in Gujarat, RB Sreekumar, who'd made a string of claims about police
and government failures.
He claimed that, on the night of the Gujarat train burning,
Mr Modi instructed officials to allow Hindus
to give vent to their anger.
He claimed Gujarat's police chief had told him this -
though the chief denied it.
Without Sreekumar, the case against the Narendra Modi
government would be much weaker
simply because there would have been no information
from inside the government which would tell you what was happening.
In that sense, he was a central figure in this investigation.
Another senior police officer, Sanjiv Bhatt, gave evidence.
NEWSREEL: The ghost of the Godhra riots back to haunt Narendra Modi.
This time it's senior police officer Sanjiv Bhatt who alleges
that Modi was complicit in the Godhra riots.
In an affidavit filed in the Supreme Court, Bhatt says that he was
present at the crucial law and order meeting chaired by Modi.
I know my truth.
I've stated my truth and I have sent there a note in an affidavit
submitted to the highest court of the land.
When he started reporting before the SIT inquiry,
my father stated that the control room contacted him,
saying that an unofficial meeting has been called
at the Chief Minister's residence and that his presence was required.
He said that Narendra Modi ended up saying that the emotions
were running very high in the Hindus and it was imperative
that the Hindus be allowed to vent their anger.
He said that Narendra Modi had directed the police force
to step down, look the other way.
Mr Modi and other officials at the meeting said Mr Bhatt did not
attend, but an independent adviser to the Supreme Court said
there was enough evidence to consider prosecuting Mr Modi.
This is a prominent legal person who has reached his own conclusions
about what is there and I think some of those conclusions needed
to be taken note of.
In major relief for Narendra Modi,
the Supreme Court-appointed rights panel has found no evidence
against the Gujarat Chief Minister.
The complainant, Zakia Jafri, had accused Modi of ordering
officials to give rioters a free hand -
the only complaint that named him.
After three years, the SIT ruled that Mr Modi would face no charges.
It said RB Sreekumar's account was hearsay, and Sanjiv Bhatt's
account could not be relied on.
It said claims about the instructions Mr Modi
had given were not established.
NEWSREEL: So, what next for Modi?
Legal experts say he has not got a clean chit in the rights -
just that there is no evidence.
But it could...
The ruling did not stop the debate over what had happened.
The special investigation team could not succeed, for many,
many different reasons.
The investigation team had to rely somewhat on the Gujarat police.
Much of the investigation on the ground is done by police officers,
and among the people who stand indicted
are the Gujarat police force itself.
The SIT report is really very superficial.
It doesn't explain how this pogrom could take place.
So, of course, it underestimates - I mean, it minimises the roles
of the top leaders, the chain of command.
To establish criminal conspiracy in law is often very difficult.
Just because they have arrived at the conclusion there was no
criminal conspiracy is not the same as saying the conduct
is above question, that there were not serious lapses.
That in no way takes away all the important questions
that still stand on the 2002 violence.
Yes, there were some people who said they were at a particular meeting
when others said they were not.
Agenda was to destroy Narendra Modi politically.
The agenda was explicitly political.
I don't think they were concerned about Muslim victims,
and these included a section of the media, these included
journalists, these included NGOs.
I think ultimately at the end of the day, the SIT findings
didn't implicate Mr Modi.
The SIT gave a clean chit to Narendra Modi.
We have to have faith on our institution and we have to put
a full stop on something and we have to move forward.
CROWD CHEERING
The verdict cleared the way for Mr Modi to run
for prime minister.
The travel bans were lifted.
Diplomatic relations with the West were restored.
I don't think that I had any doubt that Mr Modi
is going to be the next prime minister.
NEWSREEL: Narendra Modi, India's next Prime Minister,
riding into Delhi in triumph,
after he won an election landslide with his promise that good days
are coming for India.
Sanjiv Bhatt was jailed for life in 2019
over a death-in-custody case dating back 30 years.
His family insists he's innocent, and many say his trial was unfair.
The government will try to do whatever they can to ensure
that my father's voice is not heard.
He is the sole surviving witness who can tie Narendra Modi
to the carnage of 2002.
No-one has ever been convicted for the Dawood family murders.
Still feeling very angry, very frustrated.
It feels like there's no justice there.
Ehsan Jafri's widow challenged the findings of the SIT in court.
In June 2022, India's Supreme Court upheld the findings,
saying there was no larger conspiracy.
It ruled the testimonies of Sanjiv Bhatt and RB Sreekumar
were replete with falsehood and said those involved in abuse of process
need to be in the dock.
Shortly after, Mr Modi's closest political ally
spoke out about the case.
The police arrested Mr Sreekumar and a high-profile human-rights worker
who helped Mrs Jafri bring the case.
Sanjiv Bhatt, already in prison, was named in the police complaint, too.
All three are accused of fabricating evidence.
20 years on, the Gujarat violence remains controversial.
None of the people arrested were sources for our report
and the findings of our investigation still stand.
2,000 people were murdered in Gujarat in 2002
in a campaign of violence that was clearly well organised.
That remains a fact.
Now Mr Modi is in power,
it seems to me that history is being rewritten.
The Supreme Court gave a judgment which actually brought the whole
matter to a closure.
The closure was necessary.
My name is Alishan Jafri.
I am a journalist reporting on hate crimes
and the rise of extreme politics.
India is a state where calls for genocide against Muslims
are on the rise.
There is a very direct call to violence
to make India a Hindu nation.
The Prime Minister of this country should have spoken against it.
But he does not speak up.
CROWD CHANTS: Modi! Modi! Modi!
REPORTER: The man of the moment.
Prime Minister of India.
He is the leader of the world's biggest democracy.
Narendra Damodardas Modi.
He came to power promising a new age of prosperity.
CHEERING
But his rule has been marred by religious turmoil.
REPORTER: There have been violent protests
in opposition to a new citizenship law,
which many see as discriminating
against the nation's Muslim minority.
REPORTER: Many in India see this law as anti-Muslim.
REPORTER: Massive pelting.
Massive pelting as of now is going on.
This series tells the story of Narendra Modi's
troubled relationship with India's Muslims.
As a young child, Mr Modi joined an organisation which believes
that this is a country of the Hindus.
Could he have done more to prevent violence
that killed hundreds of Muslims?
We were hearing that those orders to let all this happen
were coming from the top.
It is obviously a stain on his reputation.
There's no way out of that.
I'm not agree with your analysis.
I'm not agree with your information.
From where you have picked up this type of garbage, I do not know.
He was cleared of criminal conspiracy,
a finding upheld by India's highest court.
Agenda was to destroy Narendra Modi politically.
The agenda was explicitly political.
But concerns will not go away.
Questions remained over Mr Modi's head for a long time,
and they remain over him now.
Narendra Modi has promised to build a new India.
But what does that mean for the millions of people who belong
to its largest minority?
This regime wants to disenfranchise the Muslims
and make India a Hindu nation.
HORNS HONK, THEY SHOUT
Mariam's husband, Alimuddin, was a Muslim.
His attackers were Hindu.
Prior to Modi coming to power,
there is intercommunal violence in India.
Sometimes this involves lynchings of Muslims, of Hindus, of Sikhs.
But definitely we can say
that after 2014 there are increased
numbers of lynchings towards the Muslim population.
Alimuddin's attackers accused him of trading beef,
something that had been becoming increasingly controversial
under Narendra Modi's rule.
Hindus consider cows to be sacred.
REPORTER: Two Muslim women were beaten, allegedly by the members
of a Hindu radical group.
REPORTER: Now, this happened when the police
received a tip-off that two women
on a local train were bringing beef to sell...
A large mob dragged 50-year-old Mohammad Akhlaq Saifi
out of his home,
killing him in front of his family with the equipment he uses for...
And it began with a speech that the Prime Minister made.
Mr Modi said that India was participating in what he called
the Pink Revolution.
The Pink Revolution refers to the export of beef
and the sort of bloody images of meat.
In response to that, the BJP states criminalised the possession of beef.
After that, the violence began.
Over three and a half years,
vigilantes would kill 44 people and injure around 280
in cow-related violence.
Most victims were Muslim.
Few of the attackers were brought to justice.
There were calls for Mr Modi to condemn the violence,
but he was largely silent.
His silence is heard by the people as appreciation.
It is a clear signal that - go ahead,
nothing will be done against you.
Amid mounting criticism,
on the day of Alimuddin's murder, Mr Modi spoke out.
Then there was a surprising development.
REPORTER: Three days after Alimuddin Ansari was killed by cow vigilantes,
the first political arrest in the case, Nityanand Mahato,
the BJP's district spokesman.
Police say a video of the incident shows Mahato dragged Ansari
out of the van.
BJP spokesman Nityanand Mahato was found guilty of Alimuddin's murder
and sentenced to life in prison.
But one of Mr Modi's government ministers helped him
and the other convicted men with their legal fees.
And when they were bailed,
he welcomed them with garlands of flowers.
REPORTER: Jayant Sinha remains brazen,
despite outrage over his move
to welcome and garland the eight convicts of the 2017 lynching.
So is there tacit support by the state for actions like these?
Mr Sinha said he assisted the men because they were poor.
He criticised the way photos of him with them had been misused,
but said he would not do it again.
Over four years later, the men are still free.
The clear message is that this is a Hindu majoritarian country
and anybody who does anything or takes any action
which is against the sentiment of the Hindus of India
are going to be targeted.
If there is evidence that certain people
have been guilty of things like lynching,
it is not the business of a political party
to condone them or felicitate them.
At the same time, to generalise from this incident
to mean that this is the standard practice in India,
this is the character of the BJP, is, to my mind,
an unwarranted assumption.
If you look back at it now,
the lynchings are the beginnings
of things that became bigger and bigger.
They are so disturbing and horrifying.
They were the early warning system of what was coming.
CROWD CHANTS: Modi! Modi! Modi!
When Mr Modi ran for a second term as Prime Minister,
his brand of Hindu nationalism
was backed by a record number of Indian voters.
His party won the largest majority it had ever seen.
India's Prime Minister, Narendra Modi,
has secured a second five-year term
in the country's historic general election.
For the first time, the BJP won in areas which they had NEVER won in.
You got stupendous victories.
Modi had really, truly become a pan-India figure.
A victory for Mr Modi was interpreted
as a mandate for the muscular nationalism
that Mr Modi and his government had been projecting.
CROWD CHANTS: Modi! Modi! Modi!
REPORTER: The man of the moment
who will take oath of secrecy and office
for the second time as Prime Minister of India.
He was now one of the most powerful politicians
the country had ever seen.
They realise that they can quickly instigate their agenda.
The fundamental aim is to Hinduise the way that India functions
and irrevocably change the political, social
and cultural nature of India.
Essentially, the gloves are off.
Mr Modi is definitely trying to make India a majoritarian country,
you know, where Hindu primacy is established.
I don't think that there's any doubt about that.
This regime wants to accommodate the Hindus
and basically disenfranchise the Muslims.
The idea is to make India a Hindu nation.
There is a Hindu population in India.
It's more than... Around 80%.
Major support for BJP comes from those people,
those who consider themselves as Hindu.
That doesn't mean anti-Muslim party or anti-Sikh
or anti-Christian party.
It is the most centralised government that has ever
been run in India.
There's almost no pushback to any kind of order
that comes from Narendra Modi.
All decision-making is directly controlled.
Mr Modi would quickly turn his attention to the only part
of India with a Muslim majority.
I'm Habeel Iqbal.
I'm a lawyer and I work in Kashmir.
Many rumours were going on that the government are going to change
Jammu and Kashmir.
What the politicians were saying made it clear that something
sinister is in the offing.
Kashmir is one of India's most sensitive areas...
..marred by years of terrorism
and part of a bitter conflict with neighbouring Pakistan.
For some 70 years,
special rules had allowed Kashmiris to run their own affairs.
But this was unacceptable to the party in power.
The BJP's manifestos, right from the '90s or even earlier,
had certain particular demands which were there.
One was the rescinding of Article 370,
which gives special status to the state of Jammu and Kashmir.
We regard the whole of Kashmir as a part of India.
So we said, "Why should we have
"this Article 370 to keep Kashmir differently?"
Nine weeks after Mr Modi's swearing in,
troops were sent into Kashmir.
REPORTER: The government approves sending in 10,000
additional paramilitary troops to Jammu and Kashmir.
REPORTER: The centre is now rushing about 25,000 more
paramilitary personnel to the valley.
Now, this is all for a massive security drive to counter terrorism
and bolster the security preparedness.
REPORTER: Major politicians in the region
were placed under house arrest.
Internet and phone services are completely cut off.
Strict curfew was put throughout Kashmir.
There was a complete communication blackout.
Completely, we were cut off from the outside world.
The fear and anxiety was creeping up.
On the 5th of August, Mr Modi's government scrapped the arrangement
that gave Kashmir autonomy and took direct control.
REPORTER: India's government has made a significant move
to take direct control of the state of Kashmir.
Opposition parties have called this one of the darkest days
for Indian democracy.
Now you can say that Jammu and Kashmir is ruled from New Delhi.
And a new policy of "Indianisation" is taking place.
Three days later, Mr Modi addressed the nation.
It was a hugely popular decision within the country.
It may have been contested and there might have been other
issues which, vis-a-vis relations with Pakistan,
but within the country it was hugely popular.
But in Kashmir, the reaction was stark.
EXPLOSION, PEOPLE SHOUT
REPORTER: In spite of a curfew,
hundreds of protesters clashed with police after Friday prayers.
The government knew that there would be huge protests.
But the response of the state has been the same
whenever any protest takes place
to suppress and to silence the protesters.
People were arbitrarily detained.
They were arresting people left, right and centre.
It was like a horror show.
Nearly 4,000 people were detained in the first month alone.
Habeel says he began to hear claims of beatings and torture
at the hands of the authorities.
People had been taken in the dead of the night
and they were subjected to extreme physical torture.
One guy I met,
torture was being done on him
and at the same time,
a public address system was kept near him
so that the entire village could hear him cry.
It was the tactic to intimidate the entire population.
They don't want the world to see what is happening in Kashmir.
The Indian army has vigorously denied claims of torture.
But the UN's most senior human rights expert spoke out.
I am deeply concerned about the impact of recent actions
by the government of India on the human rights of Kashmiris,
including restrictions on internet communication and peaceful assembly
and the detention of local political leaders and activists.
Kashmir is very important for Mr Modi
to harness the Hindu vote in other parts of the country.
Showing that the Kashmiri Muslim citizens are being controlled,
are being checked, are being shown their place
is very important for Mr Modi's political sustenance.
After, you know, 70 years of this being in a limbo,
Jammu and Kashmir is back to where it should be.
It's a fully integrated part of the Indian Union.
NEWSREADER: There is a growing set of concerns
over a wave of killings targeting Hindus
in Indian-administered Kashmir.
In the years that followed,
there were incidents of anti-Hindu violence.
REPORTER: The Indian government denies
that there's an atmosphere of fear in Kashmir.
It says its policies are bringing peace and development.
During his election campaign, Mr Modi had promised to tackle
a major concern for Hindu nationalists -
illegal immigration.
He said he would introduce
a national register of Indian citizens.
CHEERING AND APPLAUSE
The NRC was already being tested in Assam, in a long-term trial
monitored by India's Supreme Court.
For decades, large numbers of Hindus and Muslims
had migrated here from neighbouring Bangladesh.
The Muslim migration into Assam has been for economic reasons.
The Hindu migration was basically because of religious persecution
and edging out of the minorities from Bangladesh.
If you want to create a modern state where citizens
should have all the rights, so at least you should define
who your citizens are.
In every other country, there is a national population register.
BJP wanted to do that and they should do that.
They have all the right.
Some feared what the NRC would mean for Assam's large Muslim population.
But Mr Modi said it would only target illegal immigrants.
What it said was, if you could show documentary evidence
of your ancestors being in the state of Assam before 1971,
you would be included in this National Register of Citizens.
If you could not do so, this would become a problem.
One of those who had to prove he was Indian
was Muslim rickshaw driver Nur Hussain.
with the papers for Nur's wife, Zahara.
So she was arrested, too.
Nur and Zahara took their children with them.
They would all spend the next 18 months in a detention centre.
This is not a country that is trying to manage a refugee problem.
This is a country that's manufacturing refugees
out of its own population, you know?
This is incredible.
Under the National Register of Citizens, 700,000 Muslims
were reportedly declared illegal immigrants,
but so were more than a million Hindus.
The government proposed a controversial amendment
to India's Citizenship Act that would help solve this problem.
The CAA says that those people who migrated to India
without documentation from Afghanistan, Bangladesh
or Pakistan, which are India's neighbours,
before December 31st, 2014, would be
given citizenship automatically,
unless they were Muslim.
It's meant, purely, in my opinion, to go after Muslims in this country.
It was not against any particular community or group.
It was in favour of persecuted minorities, which includes
Hindus, Sikh, Christians, Buddhists from Bangladesh,
Pakistan and Afghanistan.
Unfortunately, it was misinterpreted in some quarters as meaning
that it could lead to the citizenship of some people
being taken away.
The law never said that anything can be taken away.
The law spoke about giving citizenship to people.
Was Mr Modi right in getting this into parliament
and getting it enacted? Yes.
It is something that was welcomed all over India.
THEY CHANT
But protesters took to the streets to voice concern
about the future for Muslims in Narendra Modi's India.
REPORTER: Thousands gathered to protest against the bill
in several states in India,
describing it as a discriminatory legislation
intended to target Muslims.
TRANSLATION: This bill will not harm even a little bit any minority,
especially our Muslim brothers and sisters who live in this country,
because this bill only gives citizenship.
It doesn't take it away from anybody.
In this bill, they are targeting a community without naming it.
It violates the basic structure of the Constitution.
It is divisive and exclusive.
They are directly saying that all refugees are welcome
except Muslim refugees.
You're just putting a whole population into insecurity.
So that was the basis on which these huge protests rose up.
REPORTER: Many in India see this law as anti-Muslim and say it goes
against the fundamentals of India's constitution, which says everyone
is equal before the law.
The reaction in the country was massive.
The stake was very high.
It defined the identity of India.
The very identity, the very nature
of the Indian state was at stake.
In Delhi, students at a prestigious university
gathered for a protest march on India's parliament.
All we wanted was one march to the parliament
to register our protest against the CAA and the NRC.
I strongly believe that the CAA can make a lot of Muslims stateless.
That is why, you know, we've been very vocal.
The police barricaded the road and, you know, stopped the students
from marching forward.
That is when some students tried to cross the barricade.
Tear-gas shell is fired,
and it just falls right in front of me.
I just couldn't breathe.
One of my friends, he was completely drenched in blood.
We did not expect that a students' protest would be met out
with such brutality by the police.
It was an unbelievable situation to be in,
in Delhi, in the heart of capital.
It suddenly seemed like a war zone now.
The violence prompted more student protests.
The demonstrations spread.
Then, at the university,
the police decided to move in.
THUDDING, SCREAMING
Suddenly, the police burst inside...
..beating people like anything.
SHOUTING
Students were hiding under the tables and, you know,
they were shouting for help, for mercy,
but the police action continued indiscriminately.
GLASS SHATTERS
SHOUTING CONTINUES
REPORTER: Students try to hide from the police
and shield themselves from the tear gas in the air.
In the men's bathroom, an injured student,
and another one, who lay unconscious.
Dozens of them were taken to the local hospital.
Police came inside. They dragged us all...
They say they were beaten by the police for protesting
against India's new citizenship law.
They beat up the students.
They vandalised the university,
created an environment of fear and terror, to teach us a lesson,
to never protest again.
The police said they were trying to restore law and order.
Their actions led to even bigger protests.
REPORTER: Today, people marched...
..in Delhi...
..Mumbai...
..Kolkata, against what they see as a divisive law
that discriminates against Muslim migrants.
An unprecedented show of dissent
against the country's Hindu nationalist leadership.
REPORTER: Protests have now escalated
and it's across the country. It's now a pan-India agitation.
NEWSREADER: There have been violent protests in major cities
across India, mostly in opposition to a new citizenship law,
which many see as discriminating
against the nation's large Muslim minority.
In Delhi, protesters occupied parts of the city
and said they'd stay until the new law was repealed.
Safoora Zargar was among them.
I think more and more people become aware of the consequences
of the CAA and NRC,
you know, and that is why I feel that this protest became a movement.
I'm puzzled as to why there should have been
a significant Muslim protest in places like Delhi.
They were very much Muslims who'd been settled in Delhi
for a long, long time.
They were not threatened in any way.
And in my view, this was not a protest about citizenship.
This was a protest about Muslims feeling
that they had lost their foothold
in the political system over the past...
..seven, eight years.
Hardline Hindu clerics made threats against the Muslim protesters.
Supporters of Mr Modi held their own demonstrations.
You had senior BJP politicians appearing
and threatening the protesters.
As the protests entered their third month,
Narendra Modi's India had never seemed so divided.
But support for the embattled Prime Minister
came from an unexpected quarter.
CHEERING AND APPLAUSE
We now invite the dynamic,
dedicated and determined architect of New India,
Honourable Prime Minister Shri Narendra Modi
for his welcome remarks.
CHEERING
Friends,
I present to you, my friend...
..India's friend, the President of the United States of America,
Mr Donald Trump.
CHEERING AND APPLAUSE
Namaste, Trump!
Namaste, namaste.
CHEERING AND APPLAUSE
Let me begin by expressing my profound gratitude
to an exceptional leader,
a great champion of India,
a man who works night and day
Prime Minister Modi.
CHEERING AND APPLAUSE
Your nation has always been admired around the Earth as the place
where millions upon millions of Hindus and Muslims
worship side by side in harmony.
Your unity is an inspiration to the world.
We love you. We love you, India, very much.
Thank you. Thank you.
CHEERING AND APPLAUSE
LOUD BANG
REPORTER: The situation is deteriorating as we speak.
Anti and pro-CAA protesters clashing.
Violence and vandalism continues.
REPORTER: This violence between anti and pro-CAA protesters
took a turn for the worse.
REPORTER: You can see the situation is very volatile.
Both the sides are clashing with each other.
You can see again, massive pelting.
Massive pelting as of now is going on.
REPORTER: The national capital, a battleground.
Violent clashes between Hindus and Muslims have rocked the city.
ANIMATED CONVERSATION
LOUD CRACK, HE CRIES OUT
HE SINGS QUIETLY
RAGGED SINGING
PROTESTER GROANS
POLICEMAN SHOUTS
The video of Faizan's beating went viral.
This Muslim man was beaten to death by the police.
Faizan was 23.
When I saw that video, I really thought,
what a disgusting society we are.
What a disgusting society we are.
EXPLOSION
The violence lasted for six days.
They are meant to protect all of India's people.
But here, the police are seen with Hindus throwing
stones towards Muslims.
Videos like these have been emerging since the violence last week.
500 people were injured during the riots.
53 were killed.
Two thirds of the dead were reportedly Muslim.
An investigation by Amnesty International concluded
that the police committed serious human rights violations, including
torture and ill treatment, excessive and arbitrary use of force
on protesters, and active participation in the violence.
The Amnesty report on the violence in Delhi showed that the police
did not act as it should have acted.
Where it did act, it often named the wrong people.
Often the victims were named as the perpetrators of the violence.
And we called for a proper investigation into these acts,
which hasn't happened so far.
Delhi police said the Amnesty report was lopsided,
biased against the police, and maliciously made a case
of human rights violations.
In the larger scheme of things,
the Delhi riots were not important, but they were important to the media
because it means less work and you can get good media footage
just at your doorstep.
No police officers have been charged over the beatings
of Asim and Faizan.
Delhi police say their investigation continues.
The police arrested more than 2,000 people over the violence,
both Hindus and Muslims.
And in the weeks that followed, they launched operations to arrest
those they considered ringleaders of the riots.
On 10th April, the doorbell rang.
My husband came and he just said,
"Some people have come to ask you questions."
A group of seven or eight policemen said, "Pack your bags."
I was not expecting my arrest.
They took me.
And the roads are completely empty and deserted.
I couldn't see anybody.
That was the scary part of it.
That feeling of being so alone.
There were charges against me, including hate speech, rioting,
criminal conspiracy,
murder.
Attempt to murder.
The maximum sentence would be lifetime imprisonment.
This is the Tihar Jail.
India's most-hardened criminals are kept here.
Muslim student Safoora was arrested and charged under a new legal
provision in an anti-terrorism law
called the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, or UAPA.
The first act of Mr Modi after becoming Prime Minister
in his second tenure was to make an amendment in the UAPA
which permitted the government to declare individual citizens
as terrorists, which was completely different from organisations
being declared as terrorist organisations.
Anybody could be declared a terrorist and be put behind bars
and would not be able to get bail for a long period of time.
First of all, I was put into complete isolation.
There's a cell, a very small cell.
I was pregnant and it was my first baby.
My biggest nightmare was giving birth in jail.
I couldn't imagine doing it all alone inside a prison.
Safoora spent 74 days in jail.
Safoora Zargar, the pregnant Jamia Millia Islamia student, was granted
bail today by the High Court after the police did not
oppose her bail on humanitarian grounds.
She is one of 16 Muslims accused of being key conspirators
in the Delhi riots, and charged under anti-terror laws.
TOY SQUEAKS
It started like a complete witch hunt of all those people who were
involved in the anti-CAA protests.
And, you know, to suppress dissent, to make an example out of us
and to put us behind bars.
I'm very confident that they will not be able to prove even
one charge against us.
There was CCTV footage,
there were messages, there were WhatsApp group chats.
On the basis of that, they got arrested.
And they were people from different communities,
not from a particular community.
The irony is that when...after the riots were over, the victims
became the guilty men and women,
and were accused of being responsible for the riots.
So, many were sent to jail, and they are still in jail.
By now, India was battling a new threat - coronavirus.
Strict lockdowns made further protest impossible.
But enmity between Hindus and Muslims remained.
I am a journalist reporting on hate crimes and the rise
of extreme politics.
Mostly my job is to go through videos of violence and hate speech.
India is a state where calls for genocide against Muslims
are on the rise.
A colleague was reporting from the Dharma Sansad,
that is basically Hindu religious parliament.
What they talked about was how Muslims should be eradicated
from the face of the earth.
Generally, we come across 10 to 12 videos per week.
Sometimes there are 10 to 12 videos per day.
These videos spread like wildfire.
They just go viral.
Muslims have got the message that they should not expect the state
to protect them.
We are talking to each other saying, "Do you think it will happen?
"Do you think it's really going to be like Rwanda?"
Why do I speak to you on this film?
Only so that there's a record somewhere that all of us
didn't agree with this, you know?
But it's not a call for help, because no help will come.
In June last year, a BJP spokeswoman made comments
about the Prophet Muhammad on TV that angered Muslims in India
and around the world.
Two Muslim men killed a Hindu who they said supported
the politician's comments.
The men were arrested after they posted a film of the killing
online and made threats against Mr Modi.
There are extremist groups from either side.
And because of the provocation of social media,
that has become a phenomena, you can say.
Even if there are calls from Hindu groups, then there
are Muslim groups also.
This is happening from both sides, and this should be stopped.
We should take action, whether it's said by Hindus,
whether it's said by Muslims, whether it's said by Sikhs,
or whoever, there are boundaries of free speech...
..in India.
And there should be.
I think the larger issue that we do not promote any form
of extremism has been said by Mr Modi many times.
The work that many of us do is very dangerous.
I have received death threats, but that does not deter me.
Reporting today has become more risky, more dangerous,
more difficult, and quite frankly,
based on where we are today,
the path looks even rockier.
Today in India, reporters face violence, intimidation and arrest
for doing their jobs.
Campaigners say press freedom has declined since Narendra Modi
came to power, and is now in crisis.
He views independent media as something that is going to do
damage to him and that is hostile to him.
I think he believes in the politics of full-spectrum dominance.
From his point of view, throttling the media, or exercising a high
degree of control over the media, is essential to his project.
Human rights campaigners say they are also under attack.
Amnesty in India says it was forced to suspend operations
by the government.
The government said the group had broken the law by circumventing
rules around foreign donations.
What he has done, in effect, is to be able
to shut down a very large part of civil society in this country.
Thousands of NGOs have shut after 2015, and it's quite dire.
I don't think that the NGO space, the civil society space,
has seen such a time ever in the history of independent India.
When Narendra Nodi came to power in 2014, India was considered
to be a free country by the US think-tank Freedom House.
Now it is only partly free.
Our democracy may not be perfect.
But it keeps on improving.
And I think there's enough elbow room for everybody to have opinions,
whether they are...rational or otherwise.
Safoora Zargar remains on bail.
They have dehumanised Muslims in the country.
It is being made very clear -
Muslims will have to live like second-class citizens.
Kismatun is still fighting to identify the police officers
who beat her son to death.
The men accused of attacking Alimuddin Ansari are
still out on bail.
Under Narendra Modi, India has been transformed.
He remains enormously popular
and hugely divisive.
What was politically incorrect has now become the consensus.
No longer does a Hindu think that it is wrong to demand special
rights for Hindus.
Mr Modi has been able to successfully give voice
to this sentiment.
Muslims in India are in a position that they've never been before,
and I don't know how it is that we'll be able to come out of it.
The perception that Mr Modi is anti-Muslim is widespread.
I don't deny that. It's there.
But I think what is important to realise is that - is there a single
institutional obstacle which debars Muslims or gives
Hindus exceptional privilege?
There isn't.
The West is looking at India as the best way
to balance China.
And that is the reason why they will not criticise, they will not condemn
most of the decisions which have been made.
Human rights are not very high on the list any more
because there is a bigger challenge.
It is important to the West not only economically but also politically.
Any big conversation in international affairs,
climate change, global finance, requires India to be in the room.
There can be no solution without India.
But it looks to be descending into some form of authoritarianism
where power is in the hands of one individual.
I think with a high degree of certainty, he'll win the next
election, maybe he'll win the election after that.
And that means for young people in India that that will be the only
India they know.