UK Prime Minister Rishi Sunak defended Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the British Parliament, claiming he “doesn’t agree with the characterisation” of his Indian counterpart in the BBC documentary series.
Sunak commented on the contentious film that Imran Hussain, a British MP of Pakistani descent, brought up in the British Parliament.
Sunak responded to Hussain’s inquiry regarding the BBC report with, “The UK government’s position on this has been clear and long-standing and hasn’t changed, of course, we don’t tolerate persecution where it appears anywhere, but I am not sure I agree at all with the characterization that the honourable gentleman has put forward to.
During the Gujarat riots of 2002, the national broadcaster of the UK, BBC, aired a two-part series criticising PM Narendra Modi’s time in office as Gujarat’s chief minister. Following backlash, some platforms pulled the documentary.
Leading British citizens of Indian descent criticised the series. Lord Rami Ranger, a prominent British citizen, claimed that the “BBC caused immense harm to over a billion Indians.”
Rami tweeted, “@BBCNews, I condemn your biassed reporting.” You have injured more than a billion Indians a tremendous deal. It makes fun of the democratically chosen @PMOIndia Indian police and judiciary. We deplore the riots, the deaths they caused, as well as your skewed reportage.
The Ministry of External Affairs responded to the BBC story by claiming that it was entirely biassed.
We believe this is propaganda, MEA Spokesperson Arindam Bagchi said during a weekly briefing in New Delhi. This is not impartial. That’s prejudiced. Be aware that India has not yet seen a screening of this. In order to prevent this from losing much of its dignity, we don’t wish to respond more.
He also questioned “the exercise’s aim and the motivation behind it.”
“The documentary is a reflection of the organisation and people that are once again pushing this narrative. We question the exercise’s intent and the motivations behind it because we want to give these efforts some dignity”, he continued.
Bagchi stated, “He (former UK Secretary Jack Straw) seems to be alluding to some internal UK report,” in reference to alleged comments made by Straw in the documentary series. How do I get entry to that? It’s a report from 20 years ago. Why would we act immediately? How do they give it so much credibility just because Jack says it?
“I heard phrases like investigation and inquiry. We employ the colonial worldview for a reason. We don’t mince words around here. What investigation—are they in charge of the nation, as they were diplomats there? Bagchi enquired.
