The proposed amendment in the Cinematograph Act on re-certification of a film by the Chairman of the Central Board of Film Certification has not gone down well with the film industry, who is now seeking legal opinion on the proposed amendment and will soon be filing a reply to the Information and Broadcasting Ministry.
The proposed amendment also mentioned that recommendations made by the two committees--one headed by Justice Mukul Mudgal in 2013, and another one headed by Shyam Benegal to evolve broad guidelines for certification within the ambit of the Cinematograph Act--have been examined and efforts have been made to consider all the relevant issues through internal reviews of the Act in consultation with various stakeholders.
Vishal Bhardwaj (Filmmaker): If a certificate is recalled there is no autonomy left
Filmmaker Vishal Bhardwaj feels that this proposal will take away the autonomy of the Censor Board. He opines, "It is completely wrong. The board members are selected by the government and even the chairman is selected by the government. And if a certificate is recalled there is no autonomy left. Then the proposal should be scrapped. But why was it proposed in the first place? It is mentioned that the Shyam Benegal committee has made suggestions which I think is doubtful. You should ask Shyam Benegal did he propose this also".
Shyam Benegal committee which was formed during Pahlaj Nihalani’s tenure has no mention of recertification in its report. The committee has clearly stated that the CBFC should function as a certification body. The certification of CBFC has to keep within the rights and obligations as laid down by the constitution. Also, the chairman should play the role of a guiding mechanism for the CBFC and not get involved in day-to-day affairs of certification of films.
Shyam Benegal (Filmmaker): Recertification of film, according to me, is against the whole ethos of the constitution itself
When contacted, Shyam Benegal said, “If you look at the report, there is no such thing on recertification. The issue is a very simple one. The fact is that the government wants to take over the job of what should rightfully belong to the CBFC. There are two choices--either get rid of censorship or it is going to be a simple process of certification. For certification, you will probably have to say that the limits of your self-expression must be contained within the constitutional limits of the country. There are two things: either you get rid of censorship or follow the simple process of certification. For certification, you probably will have to say the limits of your self-expression must be contained within the constitutional limits of the country. Recertification of film, according to me, is against the whole ethos of the constitution itself”.
Mukesh Bhatt (Filmmaker): Once you have given the certificate you must respect that certificate
Filmmaker Mukesh Bhatt agrees with this. “They are unnecessarily creating a panic situation in the field of creativity and entertainment. I completely understand and respect that the government wants to protect the content creation in the country which doesn't interfere with the national security or religious sentiments and content which is not advisable for children. One thing you have to understand is that the CBFC is a body of people appointed by the government who are intelligent, rational, and correct. And the government thinks that they are worthy of taking the responsible call of certifying the film or not. Once you have given the certificate you must respect that certificate. So that tomorrow there is no pandemonium created,” he adds.
Nitin Ahuja (CEO, Producers Guild of India): We are in broad agreement with general principle that there needs to be an expansion of the range of CBFC certificates
CEO of the Producers Guild of India, Nitin Ahuja reveals that they are still examining the proposal in consultation with other members. “However, we are in broad agreement with general principle that there needs to be an expansion of the range of CBFC certificates. Indeed it has been so long our concern that the current system of ‘U’, ‘UA’, and ‘A’ certificates is too restrictive to classify the very diverse spectrum of content that is depicted in our films more clarity is required though on how the proposed age-based classifications will be interpreted and enforced by the CBFC, and the guiding principles that will be used to determine the appropriate age-classification of a particular film”.
Pahlaj Nihalani (Filmmaker): Recertification should not be done as the film has been certified by members who have been chosen by the government
Filmmaker Pahlaj Nihalani, who once headed the film certification body, informs, “There used to be a rule which was under section 6 of the Cinematograph Act 1952 which allowed the ministry to recall a film after certification but it was challenged in Karnataka Court after which the board had to do away with it. Recertification should not be done as the film has been certified by members who have been chosen by the government,” he asserts, adding that another point that needs to be discussed is that the proposed new rating is not making any sense. “Also tribunal was one place one producer could go to but that has been taken away and he has to now straight to court. I remember when I was the chairman and ‘Udta Punjab’ was in court, the court instructed the board you are certification body and job is to certify but on the other hand, in the case of ‘Jolly LLB’, the court called the film and added four more cuts. So, there is no uniformity here. Also, the government spent crores of rupees to form the Mudgal and Benegal committee but failed to incorporate any of the recommendations made by the two committees; it was sheer criminal waste of money,” he fumes.
Even before the Shyam Benegal committee was appointed and suggested, Pahlaj Nihalani, having just completed one year as the CBFC chief had made an important suggestion. He said, “I had suggested in the prevalent scenario there was a need for a six rating system so it would be easy to certify films without any modification. I remember the then Minister of State Rajvardhan Rathore met with the film industry where he had said that CBFC is a certification body. That was just lip service to the film industry. None of the recommendations of both the committees that had film industry personalities were incorporated into the board. Also, these rating systems, with only two committees deciding the fate of the film's rating, will only lead to corruption as most filmmakers would want to avoid going to court as it is a longer process”.
