Two associations of film writers — the Screenwriters’ Association and the FEFKA Writers Union (of Kerala) — have written to the I & B ministry, objecting to the proposed granting of powers to the Central government to recall any certified film and cancel its certification, as proposed in the amendments to the Copyright Act, 1952, by amending section 6 of the Act.
The writers have objected to the revisionary powers sought to be granted to the Centre as they fear that the proposed Cinematograph Amendment Bill, in its current form, seeks to curtail the autonomy of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and may end up resulting in a further curtailment of the freedom of expression granted to writers. After all, the writers add, creative freedom is the soul of the profession of screenwriters. The two associations have reiterated that the reports of the Justice Mudgal Committee and the Shyam Benegal Committee, both of which were never implemented by the government despite the government itself setting up the two committees at different times, also never advocated that the Central government should have such a power.
The writers have made mention of the Karnataka high court’s judgement in K.M. Shankarappa vs. Union of India, where it struck down as unconstitutional revisional powers of the Central government as set out in sub-section (1) of section 6 in respect of films that have already been certified by the CBFC. The court held that such revisional powers of the Central government can only be in respect of films that are pending certification before the CBFC. The writers’ associations have added that this decision of the Karnataka HC was upheld by the Supreme Court.
The associations have also pointed out that section 6 in its entirety was proposed to be deleted from the Act vide the Cinematograph (Amendment) Bill, 2018. This recommendation was made by the Shyam Benegal Committee of its own and also based on judicial precedents. The introduction of the Bill, the associations have added, states that it has taken into account the observations and recommendations made by the Shyam Benegal Committee of 2016. However, in practicality, it goes against the core recommendation of the committee, the letter of the associations explains. The writers’ bodies have also referred to the fact that the Mudgal Committee report considered even the power of suspension of films, recognised in section 6(2) of the Cinematograph Act, to be an unnecessary part of the certification process. It proposed to revise section 6 of the Act to make it a legally and constitutionally sound version as per the judicial precedents set by the Supreme Court. The Committee, the associations have elaborated, recognised the right of suspension only as a means of last resort, and only when there had been or there was likely to be an imminent breach of public order as per the parameters explained by the Supreme Court in various judgements.
The two associations of writers have concluded by referring to the book The Hindu View Of Life, written by Dr. Sarvepalli Radhakrishnan (the former President of India). The book asserts that Indian civilisation is based on assimilation rather than on extermination. The former is the hallmark of Indian civilisation, the latter, of Western civilisation. The letter, written by the two bodies, adds that indeed, the Constitution of India was wedded to the concept of pluralism and inclusiveness. But extra-constitutional bans (like the ones which the Central government would be able to impose if the amendment to section 6 was carried out) restricted the free flow of thoughts, imagination, of creativity. “Such bans are thus against the constitutional philosophy, against the rule of law, against democracy, and our national interest,” the letter says in conclusion.
