In 1951, the "Central Board of Film Certification'' (CBFC) was established. It adheres to the guidelines of the 1952 Cinematograph Act. The CBFC certifies films and designates them as "U" (Unrestricted Public Exhibition), "U/A" (Parental Guidance for Children Under 12), "A" (Restricted to Adults), or "S" (Specific Restrictions) (Restricted to any special class of persons).
The GD Khosla Committee urged that the right to free speech be not restricted in 1969. In 1983, the regulations for cinematography were updated. Reforms in the CBFC were advised by the Mukul Mudgal Committee in 2013 and the Shyam Benegal Committee in 2016. But the advice hasn't yet been put into practice.
The Indian state and courts have always taken a disproportionate interest in cinema as an art form. Their strategy is best summed up in the following quote from the famous S. Rangarajan v. P. Jagjivan Ram case, which was the last significant constitutional challenge to censorship legislation and was decided over 50 years ago: "Movies drive thinking and action and ensure a high degree of attention and retention.
It affects both the auditory and visual senses at the same time... The concepts are more powerful when facts and opinions are dramatized and focused in a bright light on a screen. The mix of words and action, sight, and sound, in a semi-dark theatre with no off-stage distractions, will make an impression on viewers.
People are greatly influenced by movies. Some movie makers disregard their obligation to the community in favor of including commercial components or imposing their viewpoints. These have a bad effect on social groups and religious institutions.
Censorship Is an Outdated Concept
People can mentally select what to see and what not to. Governments have no business determining what citizens are permitted to view. On television and the internet, there is no restriction on the material. Therefore, it serves no purpose to censor only films.Majoritarian ideas are imposed on others because of censorship.
It infringes on Indians' right to free speech and expression as stated in Article 19(1) of the Indian Constitution.
Censorship prevents creativity from thriving. Films based on novel ideas will encounter difficulties.
Members of the censor board might not represent the views of the entire population. How can a select few people determine what is deemed appropriate by society?
Censorship will allow financial power to govern society. Rich individuals have a real impact on politics.
Movies are made with a lot of time and money investment. They will be deterred from making additional movies if portions of the film are removed in the name of censorship.
Over seventy years ago, when the film was still relatively in its infancy, it occasionally inspired wonder and horror. The world placed more limits on cinema than any other media since it was the first one to truly appeal to the masses and there was a risk that viewers would have uncontrollable "urges" because of experiencing genuine emotions. But back then, the world was much more traditional and different than it is now.
Most western nations have already abandoned film censorship. The views on sex, marriage, and social interactions have all evolved, even in India. Politics-related illusions have been dispelled, and there is a greater openness to considering and investigating ideas.
Censorship Is Not an Outdated Concept
Without censorship, there is a risk that films that offend some groups will be screened in public. Violence might result from this, endangering public peace.As a society, we must guard against exposing kids to inappropriate material.
To cease deceiving people for political purposes, censorship is necessary.
It is important to limit "bad influence" that might harm young people.
The Censor Board operates under the tenet of Article 19(2) of the Indian Constitution, which states that freedom of expression must not imperil the nation's integrity or sovereignty.
Censoring movies will be less useful if television and the internet become more widely used. Most of India's entertainment comes from still movies; hence it is the obligation of filmmakers to avoid portraying any group negatively in their work. How can we criticize anything if we aren't participating? We now filter instead of looking at the context because of our anxiety about looking at the issues.
Written By - Anusuya Dey
0 Comments