Join the discussion
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
Written by
Vikram Raghavan
The ‘Viswaroopam’ Affair
Further reading
In this piece, the author revisits the legacy of Bhulabhai Desai and his masterful defense at the Indian National Army Trials of 1945, exploring how Bhulabhai’s arguments not only reframed the INA’s...
The blog analyses the Mineral Area Development Authority decision, specifically analysing the question of when states can start taxing mining entities, along with an analysis of the doctrine of...
Blurb: The article argues for disability-inclusive prison reforms, emphasizing the right to reasonable accommodation and the right to dignity for incarcerated persons with disabilities in light of...
Blurb: The article argues for disability-inclusive prison reforms, emphasizing the right to reasonable accommodation and the right to dignity for incarcerated persons with disabilities in light of...
The first part of this analysis delved into the Supreme Court’s judgment in Ashok Kumar Sharma & Ors v. Union of India, where it misread the International Rule of Law (IRoL) by focusing on...
Blurb: A petition was filed in the Supreme Court, seeking the suspension of military exports from India to Israel in light of the unfolding armed conflict in the Occupied Palestinian Territory. The...
I agree ! Freedom of Speech & Expression has been accorded a very important place in our constitutional scheme of things, though restrictions in the interest of public order/morality are always there, the decision of a statutory body like CBFC should be given maximum weightage – since authority is well aware of our constitutional ethos, and has people from various walks of life on it's board representing diverse interests. State Governments in this task should strengthen artistic freedom, and not give in to ransom by fringe elements, indulging in nothing but political opportunism
Bharat
http://www.advocatebharatchugh.wordpress.com
I, of course, fully support artistic freedom but there appears to be a power-accountability mismatch with the current certification system. I understand that film certification is in the Union list in the 7th schedule & states therefore have no say in it but I see a structural infirmity here in that they are expected to enforce decisions with significant local implications but made by the Center without their input and all of this on their own dime. Jayalalitha may be guilty of appeasement here but she has a point when she says if there is a riot tomorrow, it is her government that will be directly in the line of fire, not the Center. And no one will buy her defense then if that happens that she was protecting artistic expression and this is an acceptable price to pay. Even if the Center were to come to the state's aid and send in the CRPF, the state government will have to foot the bill of such a deployment.
Maybe the idea of giving the Center exclusive control over CBFC led process is a mistake. It may not be practical for every state to have such a review board (quite the nightmare for any producer) but some system where state representatives will pitch in might make things run more smoothly. And if the Center really wants the power, it ought to put its money where its mouth is and bear at least some portion of the (?financial) consequences of its screening decisions. Otherwise, we will continue to see this problem recur. Harini Calamur has catalogued a list of movies that have faced such bans in individual states.
Good Read… much more interesting a conclusion!
Good Read … Much more interesting conclusion!