Chief Minister of Gujarat
First Term (2001-2002)
Patel's failing health, along with allegations of abuse of power, corruption and poor administration, as well as a loss of BJP seats in by-elections and the effects of the devastating Bhuj Earthquakeof 2001, which his administration struggled to handle, prompted the BJP's national leadership to seek a new candidate for the office of chief minister. Modi, who had aired his misgivings about Patel's administration, was chosen as a replacement. L. K. Advani, a senior leader of the BJP, however, did not want to ostracise Patel and was worried about Modi's lack of experience in governance. It was suggested that Modi should be made the deputy chief minister in a government led by Patel. Modi informed Advani and Atal Bihari Vajpayee that he was "going to be fully responsible for Gujarat or not at all" and declined the proposal. On 7 October 2001, Modi was appointed the Chief Minister of Gujarat and was assigned responsibility to prepare the BJP for elections in December 2002. As Chief Minister, Modi's ideas of governance revolved around privatisation and small government, which stood at odds with what Aditi Phadnis has described as the "anti–privatisation, anti–globalisation position" of the RSS.
2002 Gujarat violence
In 2002, there was widespread Anti-Muslim violence throughout Gujarat after reports that a crowd of Muslims attacked a train carrying mostly Hindu pilgrims and set it on fire near Godhra railway station burning alive many of the passengers.[24] The Gujarat administration was accused by the opposition and sections of the media of taking insufficient action against the violence, and even condoning it in some cases. The Modi government had imposed curfews, issued shoot-at-sight orders and called for the army to prevent the violence from worsening but the combined strength of the army and state police proved insufficient. In April 2009, the Supreme Court of India appointed a Special Investigation Team (SIT) to inquire into the Gujarat government and Narendra Modi's role in the incidents of communal violence. The SIT reported to the court in December 2010 submitting that they did not find any incriminating evidence against Modi of wilfully allowing communal violence in the state.
Modi's decision to move the corpses of the kar sevaks who had been burned to death in Godhra to Ahmedabad had been criticised for inflaming the violence. However, the SIT found his decision to be justified.
In April 2012, the SIT absolved Modi of any involvement in the Gulbarg Society massacre that occurred in 2002. On 7 May 2012, the Supreme Court-appointed amicus curiae, Raju Ramachandran, observed that Modi could be prosecuted for promoting enmity among different groups during the 2002 Gujarat violence. His main contention was that the evidence should be examined by a court of law because the SIT was required to investigate but not to judge. The amicus report has been criticised by the Special Investigation Team for relying heavily on the testimony of Sanjiv Bhatt. In July 2013, Zakia Jaffri, widow of Ehsan Jafri, alleged that the SIT was suppressing evidence.
In July 2013, in an interview to the newswire Reuters, Modi defended himself against the accusations over the 2002 riots and said his government used its full strength and he has no guilty feeling. He said he was sad about the riots, adding he would be sad even if a "puppy" came under a car. Modi said
... any person if we are driving a car, we are a driver, and someone else is driving a car and we're sitting behind, even then if a puppy comes under the wheel, will it be painful or not? Of course, it is. If I'm a Chief Minister or not, I'm a human being. If something bad happens anywhere, it is natural to be sad.
This "puppy" comment erupted an political uproar in the country with many parties like Samajwadi Party, CPM, CPI and JD(U) saying he had compared Muslims to a 'puppy' and should apologise for the "humiliating" remarks.
