This article is written by Yash Kapadia. This article discusses the controversy before the release of the web series Tandav.
Table of Contents
Introduction
Controversies, scandals, and drama are the friends and foes of the entertainment industry in India. There have been innumerable instances where filmmakers, actors, and even crew members have been slammed or been victims of even physical aggression for content often perceived as disrespectful.
When it comes to online web series or any sort of entertainment-related content, where does one have to draw the line between real and fictional scenarios? Moreover, every release casting disclaimers loud and clear, as audiences, are we being too perturbed with what is shown in a fictitious world and forcing resemblances in the world we dwell in?
By way of this article, we discuss the wrath (or uncalled promotion) faced by the web series “Tandav” prior to its release.
The Tandav debacle
Tandav is a political drama streamed on Amazon Prime Video starring Saif Ali Khan in the lead role. Tandav had its share of controversy before its release and the actors, directors and producers experienced chaos during this period.
The very reason for the eruption of this controversy is a scene in the first episode where one of the actors (Mohd Zeeshan Ayyub) plays the role of Lord Shiva in a stage play, and orates, “Azaadi, what the…?” In that same scene, the narrator tells Lord Shiva that he needs to do something in order to become more popular on social media as Lord Ram’s has been gaining popularity. Shiva, therefore, asks whether he could come up with a new display picture to gain popularity for himself.
Various FIRs were filed against the web series’ star cast and crew including the producers under Section 298, 153A, and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
A BJP MP, Mr. Manoj Kotak wrote to Information and Broadcasting (I&B) minister Prakash Javadekar seeking an outright ban on the web series for allegedly ridiculing Hindu deities and hurting their religious sentiments. Various organisations and individuals complained that Hindu Gods and Goddesses had been mocked in the web series.
The first official complaint was in fact lodged by an MLA Ram Kadam at the Ghatkopar police station in Mumbai and urged the authorities to immediately take strict action against the Tandav team. An FIR was then registered at Hazratganj police station in Lucknow against the director, producer, and the writer of the web series, along with Amazon Prime Video’s India head for allegedly ridiculing Hindu Gods in a bad light. The makers were also accused of provoking communist tension by the usage of various dialogues. Furthermore, they also portrayed the Prime Minister in a demeaning manner which leaves a bad impression in the mind of a viewer.
After the makers of Tandav were booked by the aforesaid FIR by the police for hurting religious sentiments, director Ali Abbas Zafar had moved the court praying for an anticipatory bail apprehending an arrest. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court granted him a three-week transitory bail. Similar relief was also granted to Amazon’s head, the producer and writer of Tandav.
Another FIR
Anil Vij who is Haryana’s Home Minister had released a statement that the web series Tandav had hurt the sensitive religious sentiments and that the I&B ministry should definitely make a provision wherein no web series can be released before clearing a screen test conducted by the censor board. It was asserted that Tandav should be immediately removed from the Amazon OTT platform because it ridicules and mocks the homegrown politics, social culture, the wrath and dark side of the young generation, and demeans the Prime Minister of our country.
The ‘Ban Tandav’ campaign was also started by Mr. Vij after which another FIR was again filed against some members of the Tandav cast and crew in Uttar Pradesh. This time around the complaint included certain charges under the Schedule Caste/Schedule Tribe Act and the Information Technology Act, 2000, against the director Ali Abbas Zafar, producer Himanshu Mehra and the star cast that included Saif Ali Khan, Dimple Kapadia, Sunil Grover, writer Gaurav Solanki, and India’s Amazon Prime head Aparna Purohit.
Second statement
Even as there was disarray surrounding the series continued, Tandav’s director released his second statement through a Twitter post. The director confirmed that he has decided to incorporate certain necessary changes to Tandav after speaking with officials of the I&B ministry. It was further states that the team of Tandav had the utmost respect for the sentiments of the people of India and that they did not intend to hurt or offend the sentiments of any particular individual, caste, community, race, religion, or religious beliefs or insult or outrage any institution, political party or person, living or dead. The cast & crew of Tandav have made the decision to implement changes to the web series to address the concerns raised towards the same. We thank the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting for the guidance & support in the matter. We once again apologize if the series has unintentionally hurt anybody’s sentiments, read the statement.
Scenes omitted and further threats and complaints
After the rise of so many debacles and outright protests to ban the entire web series, the makers of Tandav decided to cut the portions of the scene where one character mocks the Hindu God Lord Shiva and another scene wherein the Prime Minister hurls casteist comments on another local minister thereby showing the Prime Minister in a bad light. Despite the said cuts being incorporated, this web series continued to face agitation through more FIRs and threats.
This time around in Madhya Pradesh. An FIR was filed against the makers by a local Hindutva group while more complaints were made against Tandav in Uttar Pradesh’s Greater Noida and Shahjahanpur.
In Maharashtra too, the state Home Minister Anil Deshmukh stated that the Bombay police received a complaint and necessary action would be taken abiding by due course of the law. Adding to these series of complaints, one more complaint was filed in Bengaluru for mocking and depicting Lord Shiva in poor light.
Approaching the Hon’ble Supreme Court
After the makers apprehended their arrest due to the series of complaints all over India, the makers, cast, and other members sought protection from the same. However, the anticipatory bail application for interim protection was declined by the Apex Court. The counsels were directed to approach the respective High Courts with the issues mentioned in their application more particularly in the court’s jurisdiction where complaints had been filed against them.
Entry of the Intermediary Rules, 2021
The said controversy also spurred demands for censorship and criminal penalties for OTT platforms in India. On 25th February 2021, the Government of India notified the Information Technology (Intermediary Guidelines and Digital Media Ethics Code) Rules, 2021 (the “Intermediary Rules, 2021”). Part III of the Intermediary Rules, 2021 deals with regulating digital news media and OTT platforms, such as Amazon Prime Video, Netflix, Disney+Hotstar, and Zee5 which is administered by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. From the backdrop of these anti-democratic and unconstitutional Intermediary Rules, 2021 it had been discovered that they provided a heckler’s veto power (explained in brief below) leading to the censorship of speech that is a legal right across OTT platforms in India.
Coming back to Tandav, on 5th March, 2021, the Hon’ble Supreme Court granted protection from arrest to Amazon Prime Video’s India head, Aparna Purohit in the case registered against her.
Overlapping this timeline, the Intermediary Rules, 2021 also faced criticism and backlash since they were notified and their constitutionality had been questioned and further challenged in the Courts in many cases. One of them was in the Kerala High Court in the matter of LiveLaw Media Private Limited and others vs Union of India and others, (2021) wherein the Court has passed an interim order directing that no coercive action be taken against Live Law, under Part III of the IT Rules 2021 (dealing with digital media), as Live Law is a publisher of law reports and legal literature.
In Sanjay Kumar Singh v. Union of India, (2021), the Petitioner challenged the IT Rules 2021 from the perspective of a social media user. The primary reason to challenge it was that the grounds on which intermediaries can remove content from OTT platforms were vague. The Hon’ble Delhi High Court issued a notice to the Central Government to respond to the petition.
What is heckler’s veto
With a new term to gain knowledge about, a heckler’s veto is a rundown where a government of a country has limited the right to freedom of speech and expression of a citizen/ party in order to prevent outrage or any inconsistent or uncalled reactions from the other party. The notified Intermediaries Rules, 2021 have in fact created a situation of heckler’s veto in India and weakened and limited the freedom of speech and expression in the country.
To be precise about the statement in the above paragraph, Clause II(A)(c) of the Code of Ethics under the Intermediaries Rules, 2021 states that “A publisher shall take into consideration India‘s multi-racial and multi-religious context and exercise due caution and discretion when featuring the activities, beliefs, practices, or views of any racial or religious group.”
This provision allows complaints to be filed that go beyond the letter of law as it stands currently on freedom of speech and the fora of restrictions being imposed upon this fundamental right. In addition, any person having who has any sort of grievance with the content that is published on the OTT platform may lodge a grievance with the Grievance Officer of the platform, who should acknowledge the grievance within 24 hours time, and furthermore address the grievance and reach a communicated decision within a period of 15 days. It is not difficult to ascertain a provision like this can be grossly misused and played within scenarios where the act of reviewing on app stores gets led to/ lead to the removal of several apps.
The Grievance Officer (“GO”) mentioned in the above para is only the tier-1 part of a 3-tier system. In a case where the response of the GO is not appraised to be sufficient and up to the mark by the complainant then they take the other route of appealing to the second tier. The second tier consists of a self-regulatory body with up to 6 members who are experts in media, broadcasting, entertainment, child rights, human rights, etc experts. It is pertinent to note that the composition of members of this body is subject to the approval of the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting. The third tier is where an Inter-Departmental Committee comprises officers of the Home Ministry, the Law Ministry, the Ministry of Defence, Women and Child Development, etc., and is chaired by the Joint Secretary of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. This Committee has powers to hear appeals from the second tier and also lay down punishment under the Intermediaries Rules, 2021. It can warn, censure, require an apology, classify content ratings (A, U/A, U, etc.), or even block or censor content on OTT platforms as it deems fit.
The Intermediaries Rules, 2021 and furthermore considering their scope and the manner in which they will be implemented will have a drastic effect on the very fundamental rights of the citizens of India, on the consumer as well as the creator’s position. When control over OTT content is brought into play it will lead to compliance beyond what is necessary and self-censorship on part of the OTT platforms who will be making moves to avoid large scale discretion which will be allowed to the government when it comes to penalizing.
Conclusion
Tandav however released with various cuts on Amazon Prime Video. However, this laid down a foundation that is nothing but shaky considering the right to freedom of speech and expression. In addition, the public outrage only displays the repercussions makers face when they release subjects or even a scene or a short clip relating to any caste, religion by feeble-minded viewers. It is very well known that when there are scenes of political tension or casteism, there is going to be certain outrage from a particular section of people.
With the IT Rules Notification, we did not experience any outrage as compared to the entire controversy of two scenes of a fictional web series. The underlying agenda of such IT Rules is to limit one’s own fundamental rights where the real outrage should be thrown at and not on certain dialogues of fictional characters. India has a long way to go but with time and in due course, the viewers have started accepting many genres of movies and content which were considered a stigma. However, the government must also bear in mind the rights of citizens and regulate them in an effective manner which may inadvertently lead to more accepted content being made in a populous country like India.
Students of Lawsikho courses regularly produce writing assignments and work on practical exercises as a part of their coursework and develop themselves in real-life practical skills.
LawSikho has created a telegram group for exchanging legal knowledge, referrals, and various opportunities. You can click on this link and join:
