These are bad enough days for freedom of expression in India. But there are also those rare occasions which bring cheer. A Bombay High Court division bench has ruled that films can be shown at festivals without a censor certificate, and that films screened at such fora could be in other formats, too, and not necessarily on 16mm and 35mm film.
The National Film Awards (NFA) versus documentary filmmakers Gaurav Jani, Anand Patwardhan and Simantini Dhuru case wasn't merely about technicalities as may appear prima facie.
In May 2006 when new eligibility criteria for the National Film Awards were announced, documentary filmmakers (incongruously classified as "Non-Feature" filmmakers even though some make full length films) were shocked to find that their digital and video format films could no longer compete for an NFA.
Filmmakers under the banner of "Vikalp: Films for Freedom" had
demanded in 2004 that digital format and video films be allowed to compete for the 51st National Film Awards to avoid discrimination against independent filmmakers making films on video and digital formats. Under pressure, the government changed this rule but did not accept their other demand to revoke a rule that makes censor certificates mandatory for all films entered for NFA.
A press release issued by the filmmakers said:
This year for the 53rd NFA the government mysteriously backtracked even on the format issue and once again debarred video and digital format films from the NFA. In response documentary filmmakers Gaurav Jani, Anand Patwardhan and Simantini Dhuru, supported by filmmakers associated with Vikalp, Docuwallas and others, filed a case in the Bombay High Court asking that:
(a) digital/ video films should compete for the NFA in their original
format, and
(b) the censor certificate requirement be removed as a pre-condition for NFA.During the pendency of this case, the government conceded demand (a) and allowed digital/video format films eligibility at the 53rd NFA, but refused to concede demand (b), insisting that the censor certificate requirement was a prerequisite for NFA.
The petitioners pointed out that film festivals like the government sponsored Mumbai International Film Festival (MIFF) has run for 14 years without a censor certificate requirement and the government has recently adopted a policy document which enables it to exempt more such film festivals from the purview of censorship. It is thus discriminatory to insist that a small, government appointed jury at the NFA cannot view uncensored films. After all the jury's job is to determine the best film in the country from a technical, aesthetic and social perspective and it should be allowed to view films as originally intended by their creators, before the intervention of censors.
Justice FI Rebeillo and Justice VK Tahilramani of the Bombay High Court, upheld the petitioners' arguments and ordered that the censor requirement at the NFA be struck down.
Patwardhan, known for films like Father, Son and Holy War, War and Peace, Images You Did Not See, told the Indian Express: "This case has been fought in the name of three people but it will touch all documentary and even fiction filmmakers, who can now enlist their films for the NFA without a censor certificate. We had the backing of almost 30 documentary filmmakers from all over the country."
