The Committee chaired by Shri Shyam Benegal
submitted major part of their recommendation to Hon’ble Union Minister of
Information & Broadcasting, Shri Arun Jaitley this evening. Following are
the major highlights of the report –
1.
An emphasis on certification over censorship (or so it claims)-CBFC
should only be a film certification body whose scope should be restricted to
categorizing the suitability of the film to audience groups on the basis of age
and maturity except in the following instances to refuse certification –
• When a film contains anything that contravenes the provisions of Section 5B
(1) of the Cinematograph Act, 1952.
• When content in a film crosses the ceiling laid down in the highest category
of certification.
"A film shall not be certified for public
exhibition if, in the opinion of the authority competent to grant the
certificate, the film or any part of it is against the interests of [the
sovereignty and integrity of India] the security of the State, friendly
relations with foreign States, public order, decency or morality, or involves
defamation or contempt of court or is likely to incite the commission of any
offence."
2.
More categories of certification, more leeway-Regarding
the categorisation of films, the committee recommends that it should be more
specific and apart from U category, the UA Category can be broken up into
further sub-categories — UA12+ & UA15+. The A category should also be
sub-divided into A and AC (Adult with Caution) categories.
3.
Curbing potential 'reigns of terror'-The committee has also
made certain recommendations regarding the functioning of the board and has
stated that the Board, including Chairman, should only play the role of a
guiding mechanism for the CBFC, and not be involved in the day-to-day affairs
of certification of films.
4.
The government will have no (direct) hand in appointing Examining Committee
members, but will this work?-Regarding the Regional
Advisory Panel the committee has laid down the criteria for appointment. All
nine regions will have advisory panels comprising persons who are acquainted
with the languages being certified by that regional office.
• Members from all walks of life, recommended by the National Film Development
Corporation to the Central Government – 25%
• Members of the general public recommended by the FFSI (Federation of Film
Societies of India) - 25%
• Members recommended by the National Council for Protection of Child Rights
(NCPCR) and National Commission of Women (NCW)- 25%
• Representatives of the local film industry, as recommended by FFI (Film
Federation of India) – 25%
• Women to have 50% representation
on each Panel.
5.
The board will, once again, have the power of re-certifying films for TV-Recertification
of a film for purposes of telecast on television or for any other purpose
should be permitted.
6.
The CBFC-certified version of a film will not be valid for posterity-"In
order to preserve Indian Cinema, the committee recommends that every applicant
be asked to deposit the Director’s Cut in the NFAI [National Film Archive of
India] for preservation of Indian Cinema, instead of the certified version, in
order to truly reflect the cinematic history of Indian cinema."
7.
Perhaps fewer films will be banned arbitrarily?-In
the event that complaints are received by the Central Government, the same
shall be referred to the CBFC. The Chairperson may, if he considers it
necessary to do so, refer the film to a Revising Committee for examination once
again, on account of alleged violation of Section 5B(1) of the Cinematograph
Act, 1952.
Other members of the Committee are Shri Kamal
Hassan, Shri Rakeysh Om Prakash Mehra, Shri Piyush Pandey, Shri Goutam Ghose,
Ms. Bhawana Somaaya, Ms. Nina Lath Gupta, MD, NFDC and Shri K. Sanjay Murthy,
Joint Secretary (Films) as Member-Convenor.
@bhawanasommaya
Problem, film ka second half hai, jab kahani India se Bangkok shift hoti
hai aur film puri tarha se action centric ban jaati hai.
