Recently, the Government of India banned a documentary made by the British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) named ‘India: The Modi Question’. The documentary questioned the role of Narendra Modi and his state government in the Gujarat riots of 2002. The ban evoked public outrage, especially among university students who were seen protesting and publicly screening the documentary. The law enforcement agencies used measures like the imposition of Section 144 and dispersing the crowd using water cannons to stop the screenings and regulated the wildfire spread of the documentary via social media by taking down links shared by the people primarily on Twitter, Youtube, and Telegram.
A plea has also been filed in the Supreme Court challenging the government’s decision to ban the controversial documentary. The government alleged that the documentary was filmed with a “colonial mindset” and was an international conspiracy to threaten India’s security. It presented India through a highly prejudiced lens. Internationally, Russia accused BBC of “waging an information war”. The opposition has loudly criticized the move. The BBC defended its work by remarking that it was thoroughly researched over a long period of 20 years.
India: The Modi Question is a two-episode documentary that features several personal accounts, interviews, reports, court cases, etc revolving around the state’s complicity in the Gujarat riots that erupted after the massacre of 59 Hindu pilgrims in a train at Godhra. Gujarat’s minority community, the Muslims, saw their lives and property go up in flames in the violence that followed. The wounds have still not healed after 21 years and are neither forgotten nor forgiven. BBC questioned the police collusion in the devastating violence and why the state was a mere silent spectator when Muslims were being so treacherously murdered by Hindu fundamentalists. The documentary raises ghosts of the past for Modi who was given a clean chit by a Special Investigation Team years ago. The jury’s decision on the controversial documentary is not known and the public might never know, but the almost instantaneous ban has piqued public interest, both in India and elsewhere.
While the ban may not have surprised many observers, it has raised a series of important questions in both the public and political forums. Most important of them is the issue of freedom of the press, within the ambit of freedom of speech and expression that is constitutionally guaranteed. Article 19 states that “Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression, this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.” It is imperative for India at this juncture in history not to undermine the condemnatory voices and let public opinion form based on full truths.
There have been numerous examples across the world over time when governments sought to impose bans on information that might hurt either public sentiment or their own sentiments. Indira Gandhi, during the Emergency, notoriously imposed several restrictions on media information effectively toning down the fourth pillar of democracy. So, does a ban on a book, movie, documentary, or any media hint towards authoritarian tendencies? In a liberal democracy, does censorship not reveal the ruling regime’s own insecurities? To what extent is public anger justified at government crackdown? While there may be 1.4 billion opinions on these complex questions, it is important to underline the fact that censoring information which is critical of those in power is not the right way to go. It might be effective and rather easy to implement, but it seriously harms the knowledge of society in the long run. Government crackdown creates an environment of hesitation and fear among the citizens which is not healthy for a vibrant democracy like India. People should have the freedom to express their opinions without thinking about the repercussions they will have to face if the state doesn’t agree with them.
India is now a major player in global politics and its prestige is skyrocketing worldwide. The country should not be so fearful of criticism that it cannot face a disapproving documentary. The defensive move by the Indian government will determine the relationship of India with Britain and its newly elected Indian-origin Prime Minister Rishi Sunak in the near future. As India prepares for the general elections in 2024, the documentary may prove to be a conspicuous element in the public’s decision.
Written by: Kashvi
Edited by: Mahi Bhandari
