Search

The scar left by the pogrom directed at the Muslim minority in the Indian state of Gujarat in February and March 2002 has yet to heal. That is partly because not a single murderer has been convicted, although perhaps 2,000 people died. The state government is under pressure from local activists, human-rights groups and India's interventionist Supreme Court to see that justice is done. The state government may have reasons for subverting the judicial process. Led by Narendra Modi, a hardliner from the Hindu-Nationalist Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), it is accused of having done little to prevent the slaughter in Gujarat. Many think it was complicit. The government has acted against those accused of the horrific "crime" that sparked the carnage. Using the controversial Prevention of Terrorism Act, it has charged 123 Muslims and detained nearly 100 over a fire in a train compartment, which took place in the town of Godhra. Of the 58 people asphyxiated or burned to death, many were Hindu devotees. A Muslim mob was alleged to have doused the carriage with petrol, ignited it and locked the doors. Revenge for this massacre was the BJP's explanation for the slaughter that followed. Communal relations in Gujarat raise concerns far beyond the state. The BJP itself has been in some disarray since its election defeat. Some members partly blame the setback on the stigma of the Gujarat pogrom.

The article looks at politics and government in India in the context of the country's 2014 national election, focusing on Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) leader and prime-ministerial candidate Narendra Modi, who it says is the likely election winner. It discusses Modi's tenure as chief minister of Gujarat state, India, including his handling of the 2002 outbreak of sectarian violence between the Hindu and Muslim communities.

India's Supreme Court intervened this month on the dangers of impunity, the legitimacy of the government in one of India's most prosperous states, and the integrity of the judicial system itself. It did so in the form of a stinging reprimand for the Gujarat government's failure to bring to justice a single murderer after a pogrom last year in which as many as 2,000 Muslims were killed. On September 19th, Gujarat's police chief and top civil servant were due to appear before the court. They were to be asked to show that the state is serious about prosecuting 21 Hindus accused of burning 14 Muslims to death in the Best Bakery in the town of Vadodara on March 1st last year. The accused were acquitted after almost 40 witnesses withdrew their evidence. Suspicions of intimidation were further strengthened when Zaheera Sheikh, an 18-year-old witness, said that, out of fear, she had lied under oath. India's National Human Rights Commission petitioned the Supreme Court, asking for a retrial in another state. Apparently to forestall this, the prosecution in Gujarat appealed against the acquittals. They did it so amateurishly, however, as to enrage the Supreme Court. Human-rights activists, however, will not celebrate until the Supreme Court orders a retrial outside Gujarat, ending what T.R. Andhyarujina, a legal counsel for the commission, calls the prevailing climate of intimidation, insecurity and tension for the witnesses.

The article presents a profile of Narendra Modi, the chief minister of the state of Gujarat, India. A member of the Bharatiya Janata Party, he is described as a successful politician whose pro-business and pro-environment policies are widely praised. However, allegations that Modi did nothing to prevent rioting Hindu mobs from massacring hundreds of Muslims in 2002 have tarnished his reputation.