Opinion Jana Nayagan controversy shows — film certification process is punishment

A film was made and duly sent to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), which asked the makers to implement some cuts before it could be certified for release. It should have been a straightforward process, from conception to release, pausing only at the mandated stop at the CBFC. However, in the case of Jana Nayagan, like so many other films before it, the path to the big screen has become tortuous, winding through courtrooms as the makers struggle to get the film out. The repeated postponement of its release, because the CBFC has withheld the certificate despite its examining committee recommending it in December, has once again trained the spotlight on the needless twists and turns of the certification process.

The problem begins with the Cinematograph Act of 1952, which empowers the CBFC to classify content for viewer suitability. The ambiguity around words like “public order”, “decency” and “morality” has repeatedly been used to turn the certification process into a censorship regime. Demands for arbitrary cuts are routine and, as reported by this newspaper in September, have intensified under what has been described as a “one-man show”. The limited scope for redressal worsens the situation. The summary abolition of the Film Certificate Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) in 2021 has left filmmakers with little choice but to appeal to the high courts if they disagree with a certificate or if one is denied altogether. The Jana Nayagan saga illustrates how punishing this process can be. The makers were forced to approach the Madras High Court when the certificate was withheld following a complaint from a member of the examining committee that their concerns had not been addressed. The initial order by the HC, directing the CBFC to issue the certificate, was reversed by another bench, after which the Jana Nayagan team approached the Supreme Court. The SC has, in turn, refused to intervene and asked the makers to wait for the next Madras HC hearing, scheduled for January 20.

Advertisement

Over the years, attempts have been made to reform the certification process, with committees headed by Justice Mukul Mudgal and filmmaker Shyam Benegal suggesting much-needed changes. As their recommendations gather dust, the space for artistic expression continues to shrink. Livelihoods hang in balance as the financial burden of long-delayed or unreleased films grows heavier.