@Kimstu : Let me try to present my case cogently to you. See if it makes sense :
- Rishi Sunak, UK’s Prime Minister is currently in the final stages of negotiating a Free Trade Agreement with India. If the deal fails, it will be a huge setback for Sunak. BBC is not on the best of terms with Sunak’s party - so this “documentary” plays to that.
- India’s Prime Minister Modi has been tried in the Supreme Court of India, per the Constitution of India and found not guilty. Some citizens were not satisfied by the judgement, and they brought a petition back to the Supreme Court and the SC summarily dismissed the case. Many in India feel that this documentary deliberately ignores the SC of India and therefore India’s consititution.
- Next year is Election year in the largest democracy. It is conducted in phases. In Election years, India has had a history of Communal riots and the general opinion in India is that bringing a 20 year old incident that has been tried in the Supreme Court is an deliberate attempt to stoke Muslim riots.
India censored Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses in India fearing riots. I think many in Europe have censored Charlie Hebdo to avoid riots too.
Here is an examination on the constitutional aspects of this censorship : BBC documentary on Narendra Modi: How India used ‘emergency powers’ to block clips online