Shilpi GulatiIn the past year, the film fraternity in India has had to deal with a spate of new concerted assaults by the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting (MIB), which could fundamentally alter the future of filmmaking and the extant film cultures in the country. In its most recent announcement in December 2021, the MIB had decided to close four public-funded institutions – Films Division (FD), National Film Archives of India (NFAI), Children’s Film Society of India (CFSI), and Directorate of Film Festivals (DFF). Like in most countries, these are institutions of national importance bearing the responsibility of preserving film heritage, promoting film viewing cultures, and financially supporting emerging and established filmmakers of India. The government’s decision to close these institutions and subsequently bring them under the mandate of a for-profit unit such as the National Film Development Corporation (NDFC) is alarming for several reasons.
Firstly, in the drastic overhaul of the public film production and exhibition system, the country’s filmmakers as the primary stakeholders have not been consulted. This raises serious concerns about the intent of the MIB and the legitimacy of the consolidation process. Secondly, within this restructuring, the future of the archives at FD, NFAI, and CFSI, the largest treasures of the moving-image history of India, remains ambiguous. It is important to remember these film archives not only play the vital role of preserving some of the most iconic art-house cinema, documentaries and newsreels made in the country, including visual documentation of important historical events and political figures.
They are, in essence, repositories of India’s pre-and post-Independence history which significantly contribute to academic research and knowledge production on South Asian cinema. On principle, they belong to the public. However, their merger with a corporation like the NDFC raises speculations of possible privatisation in the future. This step could prove to be disastrous in the name of preserving Indian film heritage. Within these pressing concerns, it is equally alarming that the Bimal Julka Committee Report, based on which this restructuring is being carried out, has been suspiciously kept hidden from the public domain.
The hasty, arbitrary and opaque decision of the MIB must be seen in the light of other events of the year. A few months ago, in July 2021, the MIB faced severe criticism on the proposed amendments to the film censorship laws in the country. At the centre of the Cinematograph Amendment Bill 2021 presented by the Ministry was the provision to grant “revisionary powers” to the union government whereby it can direct the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) to re-examine a film that has already been approved for public exhibition. In other words, the MIB had proposed that the union government be given the power to re-censor or recall a film that the CBFC has duly passed.
Overriding the sovereignty of an autonomous body such as the CBFC, the proposed amendment was, in essence, an attempt to tighten control over film exhibitions, thus making Indian filmmakers vulnerable at the hands of the union government. In this case, too, MIB’s proposal was strongly condemned by the film fraternity, where critical questions were raised about the continued use of archaic censorship laws and the paternalistic attitude of the government towards filmmakers and film audiences of the country.
The calendar of 2021 is marked with increased government surveillance of online OTT platforms, especially after the controversy with Amazon Prime’s Tandav where the makers of the show were arm-twisted into an apology by a vigilante group that claimed to be hurt and offended by its content.
Instead of controlling the rise of this kind of mob censorship in the country, the MIB came down heavily on producers, directors and writers, bringing under its jurisdiction all video, audio-visual and news materials on online platforms.
Furthermore, within the recent changes in censorship protocols, earlier in April 2021, the MIB also dissolved the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT), depriving constitutional rights to filmmakers to appeal against the decision of the CBFC before going to court. In this case, it is important to remember that the MIB had moved ahead with the dissolution without any public discussion or debate.
MIB’s actions in the last year marked a historic shift in its attitude towards the film fraternity of India and what it considers important to national interests. When seen in totality, these events reveal a pattern. On the one hand, there is an aggressive attempt to bring the public space under greater control through stricter censorship laws for theatrical and online releases. On the other hand, there is a gradual withdrawal of the MIB from its responsibility towards public-funded institutions and film practices, including documentary, fiction, experimental and animation films, that operate outside industrial modes of film production. Ironically, it should have been the other way around.
While a much-needed approach to relook at the government’s film policy is always welcome, under no circumstances must these changes be made without strategic planning that takes filmmakers into confidence. If the MIB genuinely intends to positively shape the future of filmmaking, it must move forward transparently, constitute a large-scale consultation with the film fraternity and pledge its allegiance to safeguard the right of freedom of speech and artistic expression in the country.
