Takshashila Issue Brief - A Lost Opportunity to Reform the Censor Board
Even as the Parliament is currently considering amendments to the Cinematograph Act, 1952, which lays down the legal framework for film certification, a fresh controversy over certain scenes in the movie Oppenheimer has broken out.
Despite the amendment bill being first proposed in 2019, later examined by a Parliamentary Standing Committee, and now re-introduced with some modifications, the changes are marginal at best. The amendment does not address the critical question of the relevance of censorship powers in the hands of the state authorities, the sheer abuse of which is well documented. There is no attempt towards reforming the Central Board for Film Certification or popularly called the Censor Board, which has been the demand of filmmakers and moviegoers alike.
The amendments seek to introduce more age categories for the UA (under adult supervision) rating accorded to films and once they come into effect, movies will come with UA markers of ‘UA 7+’, ‘UA 13+’ or ‘UA 16+’. This is in addition to existing U (universal), A (adult), and S (special) categories. The practicality surrounding the enforcement of such myriad ratings is a matter of another debate. The amendments also seek to remove the ten-year expiry period for certificates granted to movies, which is welcome, and introduce some penal provisions for tackling film piracy.
While age-appropriate film certification is desirable, a Censor Board which is prone to government interference and has powers to demand cuts or refuse film certification is not. Experience shows us that censorship powers have been exercised more often keeping in mind moral, religious, sectarian, and political considerations in mind rather than the illegality of the content itself. Invariably, this comes at the cost of the choices of creators and viewers and their rights of expression.
If we were to seriously consider reforming the censorship regime in India in a way that expands creators' and viewers’ choices while diminishing the scope for government interference in movie content and dialogues, the solution lies in using a marketplace model to screen films. This would require a statutory overhaul of the CBFC and empowering private film certification entities.
Markets Must Solve the Problem of Film Certification
In Takshashila Policy Advisory - Privatising Film Certification: Towards a Modern Film Rating Regime, we argue for a complete overhaul of the existing censorship regime and its replacement by a structure of private film certification overseen by a neutral and independent state entity. This involves abolishing the Censor Board and replacing it with the Indian Movie Authority with a remit different from its predecessor’s.
Institutional Mechanism
This framework hinges on the following institutional participants:
Indian Movie Authority (IMA), a functionally autonomous statutory body entrusted with the powers to regulate private entities involved in the business of film certification, by issuing licenses and minimum guidelines for film certification;
Independent Certification Authority (ICA), any private entity with a license from IMA to certify films for public distribution, upon payment of fees;
Cinema Regulatory Board, the enforcement wing of the IMA with the responsibility to ensure filmmakers and cinema halls are following the prescribed conditions of certification;
Grievance Redressal Authority, a body to empowered to hear complaints against the ICAs;
Tribunal of Movie Certification, presided by a retired High Court or Supreme Court judge with the powers to hear and jurisdiction over all complaints regarding a film’s certification, including from State Governments anticipating a law and order situation; and
IMA Journal, including a ready reckoner on the film certification process and remedies, and a compendium on all the cases decided by the tribunal and relevant case laws laid down by the superior courts of the country.
The objectives behind this suggested framework are two-fold: curbing government interventions in film certification to the bare minimum and providing more choices for moviemakers and moviegoers through independent and diverse providers of certification.
Minimum Guidelines
All film certifications will be based only upon age criteria and no other moral, religious, social, or other considerations will be taken into account. We propose the following movie categories based on what kind of content is appropriate for children:
G: Open to viewing by children;
PG: Parental Guidance, may contain some material inappropriate for children under the age of 8;
PG-13: Parents are urged to be cautious, some material may be inappropriate for pre-teenagers;
R: Contains adult material, and parents are urged to learn more about the film before taking their children with them;
NC-18: Restricted to only adults; and
K: Explicit content, allowed to be played only in cinemas with a special license and entry conditions in this regard.
The IMA must lay down indicative principles on the nature of the content which may fall into these categories for ICAs to follow. These must be revised at least every decade to ensure societal changes are reflected.
Beyond a basic qualification threshold for ICAs and adherence to minimum standards, they are free to specialise and diversify their movie rating offerings. For instance, an ICA specialising in certifying a movie based on its religious appropriateness may choose to offer such ratings to a film and a member of the audience can decide to watch the movie accordingly. This ensures that no member of the audience has a heckler’s veto over a movie meant for public consumption.
A producer who is unsatisfied with a rating may proceed against the decision of the ICA under the grievance redressal mechanism and on appeal to the tribunal if they believe the decision violates the prescribed standards. Or they may simply opt for another ICA to certify their product.
Film Certification Process
The operational workflow of the system is as follows:
In case of any objection by the State Government on account of an anticipated breach of law and order situation, the process will work in the following manner:
As a parting note, it is worth mentioning that with the explosion of online content available over multiple OTT platforms, a state-run Censor Board is practically unsuitable for issuing certifications due to the sheer volume of movies and shows being released. While the current censorship regime does not apply to OTT content yet, the framework proposed above will very well solve the problem of online content certification as well without resorting to censorship.
This Issue Brief was compiled by Shrikrishna Upadhyaya, with inputs from Pranay Kotasthane.
Further Resources
Takshashila Policy Advisory - Privatising Film Certification: Towards a Modern Film Rating Regime by Madhav Chandavarkar, Adhip Amin, Shikha Pathak, Siddarth Gore, Devika Kher, and Guru Aiyar
PolicyWTF: Casually Banning Films Committee by Pranay Kotasthane
PolicyWTF: Casually Banning Films Committee, Reprise by Pranay Kotasthane
All Things Policy Ep. 1020: Casually Banning Films Committee by Pranay Kotasthane and Shrikrishna Upadhyaya
Hotstar blocked John Oliver show even before Modi govt could ask. It’s a dangerous new trend by Prateek Waghre
