In this blogpost, Saumya Agarwal, Student, Amity Law School, Delhi writes about the censor board, need to revamp the Cinematograph Act, 1952 and the recommendation made by the mudgal committee.

Introduction

The latest controversy that started the censorship debate again in the country was the long kissing scene that was reduced to 50% in the recent bond movie. The internet domain was filled with mockery over the trends started as #SanskariJamesBond. When asked by Pahlaj Nihalani, the Chairman of CBFC, he said he didn’t see the movie. It was the CBFC panel’s decision. Although he defended the decision by saying that it was done to safeguard the culture and values of the nation and to mould the youth of the country in the right direction and they cannot set the wrong examples through their movies. The sensibility of the Censor Board is being questioned.

Mr. Shyam Benegal has been recently roped in to revamp the Censor Board. This article has been written to give the recommendations that have already been given for the betterment of the Censor Board and other recommendations that can be given.

Censor Board

The Central Board of Film Certification (often referred to as the Censor Board) is a statutory censorship and classification body under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, Government of India. It works according to the regulations of the Cinematograph Act, 1952. It main task is to assign certificates to films, televisions shows, television ads, and publications for exhibition, sale or hire in India. Films can be viewed by the public only after the certification by the Board.

The censor board publishes many types of certificates- U, U/A, A and S.

• U-(Unrestricted Public Exhibition)

These films are fit for public exhibition and are often family friendly. These films can contain universal themes like education, family, drama, romance, sci-fi, action, etc. These films may contain mild violence, but it should not be prolonged.

• U/A (Unrestricted Public Exhibition- But With Parental Guidance)

These films can contain universal to adult content, but the adult content should not be very strong but can be watched under parental guidance like brief kissing scenes, fighting scenes and mild language, etc.

• A (Adults Only)

These films will be released in the public domain, but they will be restricted to adults only. These films generally contain strong violence, kissing scenes, implied sex, tribal nudity, some coarse language and even some controversial and adult themes considered unsuitable for young viewers.

The Board consists of 25 members and a Chairperson (those is appointed by Central Government). Shyam Benegal is the current chairman of the Board.

Need to revamp the Cinematograph Act, 1952

It is an outdated Act. It is a colonial time act which needs to be changed with the changing times. As said by Rakeysh Omprakesh Mehra, “we are now living in a different world, and so we would like to take things to a next level. There is so much connectivity and information that change is the need of the hour.”[1] Times have changed; we live in a different world now as compared to the time when the act was passed. So, tremendous changes are needed in the act.

In a list of words that were considered to be controversial by the Censor Board, ‘Bombay’ which was the name of Mumbai earlier was also included. It was contained in the list which was banning the words that were “abusive” and “objectionable”.

A great need is being felt to bring the changes in the Act. Some of the changes were recommended by the Mudgal Committee.

Mudgal Committee                                

The Mudgal Committee was constituted which was headed by Justice Mukul Mudgal, retired Chief Justice of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, who proposed the changes in  the Cinematograph Act, 1952 as Cinematograph Bill, a report which was submitted to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting.

The Committee was constituted during a sensitive time in India. The socio-cultural conditions have changed tremendously in the last ten to fifteen years. So Mudgal Committee was constituted in which the members of the committee were FCAT chairperson Lalit Bhasin, Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) chairperson Leela Samson and other film personalities like Sharmila Tagore and Javed Akhtar.

The first recommendation that they gave was the change in the name of the ‘advisory panel’ to ‘screening panel’. It also recommended that there should be a committee of 9 members on such manner as to ensure language diverse representation with at least two lady members. Right now the appointment of the advisory panel is more political, often with people who have little knowledge of the intricacies of cinema which is detrimental to the process of appointment.

Another suggestion to is the increase the jurisdiction of the Film Certificate Appellate Tribunal to hear the cases regarding any objection in any film. So rather than going to the court for any objection in the film, the plaintiff can come to the Tribunal.

The Committee also suggested that there should be more categories for classification of films and to bring age-specific divisions. The Committee recommended a five category for film certification as the existing three categories are insufficient.

Another suggestion given by the Committee was to suspend the powers conferred on the State Governments and the High Courts to ban a film in their state. The Committee gave the reasoning that filmmakers put a lot of hard work and time in making a movie and the state governments ban the movie in their respective states. So the Committee recommended that the Central Government can suo moto or at the behest of a State Government or the administration of a Union Territory is of the opinion that a particular film that is publicly exhibited that causes or is likely to cause an imminent breach of public order.

The Committee drafted a Cinematograph Bill incorporating its recommendations.

Conclusion

Much hue and cry is being made over the new Benegal Committee about the fact that Mr. Benegal is himself from the film fraternity so he will make the recommendations that is actually needed in the Act. But the government should remember that the job of the CBFC is to certify films and not to censor them. What happened to the recommendations of the Mudgal Committee? Does the government choose to ignore the previous government’s constituted committee’s recommendations? Were the recommendations unacceptable to this government?

The five categories of film certification make sense as is being followed in other countries. It would be simpler to accept the suggestions given by the Mudgal Committee than to make a new committee. We all know that the recommendations given by the committees generally pile up on shelves; I hope the Benegal Committee does not meet the same fate as the earlier one.

[1] http://indianexpress.com/article/entertainment/bollywood/cbfc-revamp-need-of-the-hour-rakeysh-omprakash-mehra/