Hummingbird News Desk
NEW DELHI, 1 JULY: CPI-M Polit Bureau has issued a statement demanding withdrawal of retrograde amendments to Cinematograph Act, which could empower the government to order the re-examination of an already certified movie. They said the proposed changes would give the government overriding power over cinema and threaten freedom of expression in India.
A group of filmmakers, academicians and students have also raised their voice against the draft amendments saying that it would threaten freedom of expression.
In a statement, the CPI-M Polit Bureau said, “The proposed amendments to the Cinematography Act by the Modi Government is an all-out assault on the creative talents of film makers and the constitutional right of freedom of expression. The Central Government wants to add a provision to give it the right to “revisionary powers” on account of violation of Section 5B (1) (principles for guidance in certifying films) of the Act.”
“This is tantamount to withdraw films already certified and closed. Recently we have seen the right-wing forces led by the Hindutva brigade and casteist groups indulging in mob censorship of films not to their liking. Now the Government itself wants the powers to stop films critical of its ideology. As it is the autonomous powers of the Film Censor Board have been subverted in various ways by the I & B Ministry. In April the Appellant body to which film makers could appeal against cuts by the Censor Board to their films was arbitrarily dissolved by the Ministry.”
The Polit Bureau of the CPI(M) strongly opposes these atrocious amendments designed to throttle cinematic talent and freedom. It demands the restoration of the Appellate Tribunal as demanded by noted film makers. It supports the struggle of those in the film industry who have courageously raised their voice against this assault on democracy and freedom of expression.
Bringing in long-pending changes, the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting has put up amendments to the Cinematograph Act, 1952 for public comments. The proposed changes include three age-based categories — 7 plus years, 13 plus years and 16 plus years.
When the Act originally came about in 1952, there were only two categories of certificates — “U” (unrestricted public exhibition) and “A” (restricted to adult audiences), but two other categories were added in June, 1983 — “UA” (unrestricted public exhibition subject to parental guidance for children below the age of 12 years) and “S” (restricted to specialised audiences such as doctors or scientists).
As per the proposed amendments, the UA category will be sub-divided into three age-based categories of 7 plus, 13 plus and 16 plus years. The other U and A categories will continue.
These changes have been in offing for a very long time. An Expert Committee under the Chairmanship of Justice Mukul Mudgal was constituted in 2013 to examine the issues of certification under the Cinematograph Act, 1952. Another Committee of Experts was set up under the Chairmanship of film maker Shyam Benegal in 2016 to evolve broad guidelines for certification within the ambit of the Cinematograph Act and Rules.
The Ministry said that the recommendations made by both the Committees of Experts had been examined. But many of the committees’ recommendations have not been incorporated since the Ministry has still not done away with “A” category of certification. Mr. Benegal recommended that the Central Board of Film Certification should only be a film certification body whose scope should be restricted to categorising the suitability of a film to audience groups on the basis of age and maturity.
The filmmakers and academicians have drafted a set of suggestions in response to the Centre, which had sought public feedback on the Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill 2021.
The signatories urged the government to drop the amendments that empower it to revoke a film’s certificate. They also recommended that the amendments to the Cinematograph Act clearly define “public exhibition” and bring under their scope “only commercial films with substantive capital investment and revenue models tied to theatrical exhibitions”.
The signatories also recommended that the government restore the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal. The statutory body, constituted to hear appeals of filmmakers who were not satisfied with the cuts suggested by the Central Board of Film Certification, was dissolved in April.
Tags: #CPIM #PolitBureau #CinematographAct #CinematographAmendmentAct #Amendments
