Meeting with Narendra Modi

Full Text
Ordeal by Fire in the Killing Fields of Gujarat
Editors Guild of India Fact-Finding Mission Report

Meeting with Narendra Modi     

We had asked for separate meetings in Gandhinagar with the Chief Minister, the Minister of State for HomeAffairs, the Information Minister, the Chief Secretary and the DG Police the better to serve focusseddiscussion. However, Mr Narendra Modi met us without his ministerial colleagues or the DGP but collectively inthe presence of the Chief Secretary, the Home Secretary. a senior police official, the Revenue Secretary (wholooks after relief and rehabilitation), the Director of Information and several others.    

A large bust of Gandhiji is installed in front of the Sachivalaya and looks across the road at the adjacentOld Secretariat that houses various Government Directorates. The Old Secretariat is a protected area. Yet theGujarat State Wakf Board, located just below the Directorate of Information, and the Gujarat MinoritiesFinance and Development Corporation housed in the Block opposite, both Government offices, were attacked andtorched by a mob during office hours on February 28. Staff in all the Directorates ran for cover. The OldSecretariat was closed; later, curfew was imposed in Gandhinagar. No arrests had been made until April 2, theday of our visit. Records pertaining to dargahs, mosques, madrassas and kabristans were lost in thefire.     

We told Mr Modi of our mission and asked for his assessment of the media’s role in the ongoing crisis inGujarat. He was coy; it was too early for him to say anything about the media as CM, he said. But if NarendraModi were asked that question, that would be a long story. Coaxed to say something more, he said the media,especially TV, was very powerful. None in the media had appealed for peace. Yes, maybe editorials hadappeared, but ordinary people did not read editorials. He himself had gone on the air and repeatedly calledfor peace. (In his address over Doordarshan on February 28, Mr Modi referred to Godhra and went to state: “Gujaratshall not tolerate any such incident. The culprits will get full punishment for their sins. Not only this, wewill set an example that nobody, not even in his dreams thinks of committing a heinous crime like this”. Ina separate Doordarshan soundbyte he is reported as stating: “If raising issues relating to justice orinjustice adds fuel to the fire, we will have to observe restraint and invoke peace”. Ambiguous words these.Annexure 4AA).    

Responding to queries regarding various statements attributed to him by the media, Mr Modi denied citingNewton’s law. Nor had he spoken of “action-reaction”; he had wanted neither the action (at Godhra) northe subsequent reaction. When we cited footage in Zee to the contrary (Annexure 4A), there was no reactionfrom Mr Modi The Chief Minister said he had merely only narrated the facts and justified nothing. He waspained by a “Diary” item about his “feasting” while Gujarat burned that the Times of India had carriedthe previous week. He had merely gone to his constituency in Rajkot to thank party workers after his recentby-election victory and had had a quick, Spartan meal before hurrying away to inspect some continuingearthquake relief works. The Indian Express too had had carried unkind references to him in its “Modi-Meter”column.    

He had not said “normalcy” had been restored in 72 hours but only that the situation had been largelybrought under control during that period, unlike on past occasions when rioting had continued for weeks.Firing had been ordered and a large number of arrests had been made. Scare stories in some papers, such asabout returning Hajis and breast-cutting in Sandesh, had been officially denied but the contradictions had notbeen carried. This was because newspapers sought to sensationalise issues. Asked why the State did notprosecute offending newspapers under the law, Mr Modi said “we prefer to move on”.    

The Chief Minister justified the presence of two Ministers in the Gandhinagar and Ahmedabad Police ControlRooms. This was standard practice in Gujarat, even during the earthquake last year; moreover, the control roomwas a convenient place from which to interact with the public. (Later we were to hear of reports of a Minister’sson sitting in the police control room in Godhra. When we queried this with official interlocutors, we wereinformed that no action could be taken unless an FIR was filed. None had dared do so).    

He went on to deny reports of his comparing his term of office to a “one-day cricket match”. What hehad said when he took office was that there were 12,000 hours to go before the next Assembly elections. Justas in a one-day cricket, achieving a given run-rate is critical, he had appealed for a better “work-rate”to fulfil the Government’s promises to the people. This remark had been twisted.  

He said he had visited both Muslim and Hindu relief camps and had spoken to all camp organisers. He wouldnot like to comment on the National Human Rights Commission’s report but the media had omitted many positivereferences made by the Commission about the Government’s performance. The NHRC had also called for a mediacode and self-policing under the terms of Article I9 (2) of the Constitution.

The Chief Minister had little to say about the killing of Ehsan Jafri and the attack on the two Justices ofthe Gujarat High Court, apart from pleading an inadequacy of forces to control large mobs roving across farflung areas of the city. He denied saying that “private firing” by Jafri had enraged the mob. Words hadbeen put in his mouth as he had merely referred to a newspaper report that said this is what had happened. Healso denied any pre-planned targeting of Muslim establishments and said that local people knew the who and thewhat of these things as they lived in the same community.  

Mr Modi had no explanation for the widespread destruction of Muslim dargahs and shrines and how it was thatin at least one case the rubble had been cleared and a tarred road built over the site. The Team pointed outthat the usual complaint was that damaged rods and pavements were never repaired for months on end and thattarring a road is a major operation that calls for organisation, mechanical equipment and efforts beyondthecapability of stray hoodlums. The CM pleaded lack of knowledge but did say that he had ordered the removal ofmakeshift Hindu shrines and idols installed in some of them. He then went on to ask if it was helpful for TVto have shown a decapitated Hanuman idol at a desecrated Hindu shrine at Anjar in Kutch that very morning(April 2).

The CM defended the recent transfer of several police officials, including some who had dome commendablework in controlling riots. He felt these “long-pending promotions” would act as an “incentive”. Hesaid there could be two views opinions on this count but agreed with the suggestion that perhaps promotionsmight have been announced but the actual movement of the officers deferred until after the law and ordersituation had stabilised.    

He also accepted that he would have done well to call local editors for a frank briefing. This would haveenabled him to explain the Government’s concerns and solicit their cooperation.    

Mr Narendra Modi, like certain other official spokesmen in Delhi, also drew a comparison between mediacoverage of the Gujarat riots and the restrained and responsible role of the American media after theSeptember 11 attack on the World Trade Towers in New York. Dead bodies were not shown on television or inpress photographs. The fact is that on September 11 and for some days thereafter none other than firemen couldapproach, let alone enter, the WTC and very few bodies were recovered until much later. People were shownjumping off higher floors and clinging to windows. The two episodes are very different and there was no arson,rape, loot and rioting in New York of the kind witnessed inGujarat.            

Before we left, the conversation turned to how confidence and mutual trust might be restored. The Team saidthat commissions of inquiry in India had lost credibility because of delays and obstructions in their workingand inaction on their findings. In the circumstances, the Gujarat Government could not do better than toenable the K.G.Shah Commission to complete its task expeditiously and thereafter take immediate action on itsfindings. Mr Modi thought this a good idea. 

However, on visiting the shell of the burnt out carriage No. S-6 at Godhra station (with a Railway escort)on April 3, we were surprised to see this prime exhibit standing in the yard unguarded and stray peopleentering it at will. Anyone could remove or plant anything in the carriage, tampering with whatever evidenceit has to offer with none being any the wiser.  Furthermore, it was only on April 1 that Justice K. G.Shah, heading the one-man Commission of Inquiry, reportedly visited his office, having been provided with somestaff and other wherewithal with which to commence his labour. Interviewed over TV he is reported to have saidthat his inquiry could quite take time. As of April 6, when the last of us left Gujarat, none seemed aware ofany notification having been issued by or on behalf of the Commission calling on people to come forward withrelevant evidence or announcing any programme of work or schedule of visits. (See Annexure 5 for K.G. ShahCommission’s terms of reference).