The First Amendment; Film Censorship in India

The First Amendment and a free people. A weekly examination of civil liberties and the media in the United States and around the world. The program has produced cooperatively by WGBH Boston and the Institute for democratic communication at Boston University. The host of the program is the institute's director Dr. Bernard Rubin. This edition of The First Amendment and a free people is being recorded in broadcasting studios in Bombay India. And I'm pleased to have as my guest today Mr. kale can pour the chairman of the Central Board of Film Censors of the Indian government. Mr. Cannes for some years ago got a degree in master's degree in film cinema from the University of Southern California and has studied at other American universities. He's been with the films division of the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting in the past and for a number of years from 62 to 76 was its director for the last

three years. He's been the head of the Central Board of Film Censors the Central Board of Film Censors reviews something like 4000 films a year and issue certificates of one kind or another. Mr. Kanpur let me ask you right at the start what is the basis for the regulation by the Central Board of Film sensors in India. The medium of the film like all other media in India have a certain amount of freedom in fact the freedom of speech and expression is governed did by the Indian Constitution. Subject of course to reasonable restrictions. Whereas in the case of the other media. There is no peace censorship. In the case of the film. The

censorship exists because it is considered that it is such an important medium that sometimes it can do a lot of damage before the things can be rectified through a court of law. That's the reason for the existing censorship was the constitutional basis in the Indian Constitution for the censorship. As I mentioned he it derives its authority from the fact that the freedom of speech and expression in the Indian gun situation is subject to reasonable restrictions. Rational you mean what reasonable restrictions have been defined in the Constitution. Data lead to sovereignty and integrity of the country. The security of the state. Friendly relations with foreign states. Public order

decency and morality. Art in English and to contempt of court defamation are incitement to an offense. These are the reasonable restrictions which can be imposed. But in practice the censor boards made in distinction is with regard to decency and morality. Could you give me a typical case of where you would step in and cut some footage out of a film or perhaps refused to give a certificate to a particular film. One of the recent cases I call to mind. Well. As I mentioned that most of the cases relate to decency and morality and in our country. We do feel that when a film has too much goes. Off well get it. Our obscenity

our Wilens claim that is the time to step in. And I did too. Dawned on the film by diluting the impact of these elements are. If it is so depraving that. It's not considered suitable then to refuse it a certificated. But that is done in very very rare cases. Well in regard to those films that are so depraving What would you consider depriving is nudity depraving. Foul language depraving is the use of violence in the script depriving What did you say your main problems are when you are dealing with with questionable films. As I mentioned for items you know you got it. Sanity and. Crime and violence. Now I'll give you a specific example

from which we talk was very deprived in the south Indian film where a police officer you know flirts with a number of women and sleeps with them. He is you know a child is born and then this girl grows up not knowing that he's she's his own daughter. He sleeps with her and then a child is born to this girl and he sleeps with the third generation. You know when we saw the film we we felt that it was exceeding the normal limits and the effect would be depraving although a final decision has not been taken. Will the ever present reaction is that the film should not be

certified in Express and form. I'd like to turn to another aspect of the Indian film industry which bears upon your work. As I understand it there are three centers of the manufacture of films Calcutta drafts and Bombay and each of these as you told me before the program doesn't necessarily get produced in a country because India is so vast it is a continent. Ideas and that certainly is the truth and it is a continent with the most disparate kinds of people of the same general culture. How do you handle films from other parts of the country which are outside of your own immediate cultural milieu or your own personal experiences for example films coming from all over India to you. What's the system for reviewing these films and who reviews these films. Perhaps have not weighed myself. The films which are produced in the job are examined in mage us the films which are

produced in Calcutta are examined in Calcutta and the films which are produced are imported in Bombay are examined in Bombay and these are the three regional offices in Bombay we also happen to have the head office. The guidelines are the same to you would not see films necessarily that were reviewed Koroma TROILUS. I would see some of them because we have frequent meetings of the board in Bombay Calcutta and even in Delhi when we discuss the policy with the government. Also we see some of the controversial films that have been certified since the last meeting was held there by Dr. G. A certain amount of uniformity of course. The exact uniformity is not possible is humanly impossible. It's not a mathematical thing it's a question of value judgement. But to the extent that it is humanly possible to be uniform we try to be so. The

objectives are the same the guidelines are the same. It's a question of interpretation by the group of people in Bombay a group of people in the group of people in Calcutta and certain film centric uncontroversial films are then seen by the members of the board drawn from various parts of the country. Then we have the board meeting these 10 members of the board some from address some from Calcutta some from Delhi some from other parts of the country. We meet together and some controversial films are seen by only members of the board jointly and a final decision is taken at that stage. And that decision again is communicated those films shown to the members of the advisory panels in Bombay get an image of us. With This is what we found objectionable. This is the extent to which we have gone not permitted and could be used as a guideline by other members.

Let me ask you another question Are there certain to booze yes booze for foreign films and for local films or domestically produced films. You mention that one of the blues in the old days and perhaps today with foreign films sometimes has been kissing in the days of the British Raj it was the question of ballroom dancing which could be very easily misinterpreted. When European films shown and showed men and women dancing together. Beginning with the Indian film are there any blues that you automatically register your displeasure with. The guidelines are the same for the films that Indian are fighting. So let's say that I've pressed you before I don't do too many questions. Nudity would you would do what is your standard toward nudity. Well I would read one clause from our

guidelines which would explain our attitude should we see a slight difference in attitude between Indian and foreign films and that is that. The film would be judged in the light of contemporary standards the country and the people to which the film relates to nudity would be so culturally a bore and in India that you would not allow it. I wouldn't say that you see certain aspects of nudity would be a burden in India so that they won't be allowed otherwise the Indian society from. She will say for the last thousands of years in her stable areas and even in certain parts of India even today for example as you know in Boston all that the women not only are topless. Yes. So it will depend upon which society and in which form it is presented. If the nudity is presented in its natural form off for example this tribals in India

living in the natural form we would not have bothered about it. But if the nudity is presented and the intention of the producer is clear that he has done it with the intention of good elation then. We would take a different look at it and. Perhaps if it is taken to an extreme even cut it out particularly for universal phone. What about phone language for example. Foul language. Again the things keep on changing. No certain four letter words in foreign films until recently were completely eliminated but no words have lost that meaning. They had been used in a different context. In fact the dictionary of slang tells you that this four letter word is considered obscene if used in this sense. But if

you add a proposition off about two and if it is used in a different sense then it's no more obscene and we take that into account in the lot. And similarly with regard to the Indian language the language is a living thing and the words which are considered obscene or objection. A few years ago no accepted in the society and the sensors sensors move along with it. You know the after all senses that a part of society without joining the guidelines interpretation is not a static phenomena. It's a carry say a process of evolution. Can I ask you about the other clauses constitutional clauses for example in regard to national security. Yes. Have you had that as a problem. Not in many cases but in a few cases yes. What kind of film. We see a photo where we feel that some other country is likely

to reject. And if you are in doubt we do not hesitate to consult outside agencies who know about this aspect better than we do. For example there were a series of films on and to be a victory and to be and I think 90 minutes then to be. No the India government policy and relationships with certain countries which were mentioned in these films was such that it might have caused embarrassment. So those films are not certified and not exhibited in India. None of this of course is contrary to the American experience where we would consider it a bar and for a filmmaker to be restricted on the basis of what his government thinks is a good relationship with another countries or if somebody want to make an anti Soviet film or indeed an anti Indian film they can make it. And no matter whether a foreign government of Jack says Visa V Louis models film

about India which has been nominally strongly objected to but I think variously objected to press for some justice as Indians see this as a possible distortion of life nevertheless the BBC went on and it was played in the United States because we feel that the government should not interfere in this area. But obviously the issue here in India is much more sensitive. And filmmakers then would not produce films which were. Anti a government that the government of India wanted to be friendly with. Well the odd approach is slightly different from yours. I have not seen it and from what I have heard my personal view is that. Perhaps a little too sensitive.

I think you would because it it may have been or it may have been cruel film emphasizing the most bizarre Indian practices but I'd like to have a penny for every American film that was made that emphasize the characteristics of American culture. Sometimes we wince when we see these films. Well as I said approach is slightly different and each country has its own ethos and you know way of looking at things. If we do take into cognizance affected every film is likely to create better spend to the country we keep but as I said there are not many such films in fact a flake. There have been. Politically that have been that has been a sort of a more liberal approach. For example at one stage this film the day of the call of the YES YES

YES YES YES and good adventure story. Yes I was you know it was considered to be a borderline case. Yes. And after a lot of hesitation finally that is you know it should be shown. Similarly the film All the President's Men. You know there was a little hesitation but ultimately it was. You see during the emergency it would have been a very sensitive film but right now probably it is a serious hit film and the film was released after the emergency. It's something that's not a popular film. Like you know one of the I can understand doesn't I can understand we thought it would be but that is what happened. It was it's too esoteric isn't it. No but you see the large mass of the Indian population was not from media. That's what I mean you raise the subject matter. Yes but but enjoyed the film. Now if someone objects I'm a filmmaker and I say

Central Board of Film Censors is wrong. They're taking my artistic creation and they're not giving me the certificate or the city figure that I want. I object one of the stages for that objection how may they object. May I give a little introduction to the right by raising my own personal view is that there should be no statutory censorship that the investor should be able to regulate itself. It's interesting that it's representing the Government Board of Film Censors you. You take that position. Yes because I believe that censorship we see considering that we provide for freedom of expression in our own Constitution. And all of the media enjoy their freedom without the censorship and it's only in regard to the motion picture. Therefore I personally believe that the Precentor ship should go

even if as far as films are concerned. But the only reason why it is there is because the film industry on its own has not been able to introduce self regulation. I mean I said that the censorship is meant to be eroded from without and from within. To the extent that I can help to erode it from within I am doing my We're doing our best. I don't think I'm saying anything against the policy of the government that the moment the industry is ripe to do self-regulation they would put it on a platter and say you run it and close the censor board but as you told me before the program one of the reasons that it doesn't happen is that the country is so vast the film industry is so separated geographically that they cannot provide a uniform front. Well they have not been able to provide it so far and it's likely that they may not be able to provide it

for some years to come. But I am an optimist and I hope that after some time they would be able to provide self-regulation and then it would not be necessary for the world to exist. Personally I would be happy to preside over the liquidation of this impasse. But it will not happen while I connect you not only an optimist Peter obviously a liberal. Can you go over the steps that people would take to object. Yes and no as I mentioned to you before the program we have four stages of certification or censorship. The film is initially examined by an examining committee consisting of four non officials and one official of the board. The nation will not be this examining committee is communicated to the producer as the board's provisional decision. If the producer accepts that the film is certified and more than 90 percent of the films are cleared at that level. If the producers aggrieved Then he

asks for an amazing Committee. Now the devising committee again consists of up to nine officials and one official and 9am officials and one official and it gives its recommendation that the condition again is communicated to the producer as the provisional decision. He's also given a chance to represent his case. He's given a chance to meet the members of the committee. The members of the committee merely weighs the decision partially or wholly. And if you accept the spiritual decision then the fullness ratified and more than 9 percent of the films are cleared at that level. In other words more than 99 percent of the film that cleared the level of the board itself. In the remaining few films The number may be perhaps two three four in a year. He is entitled to go in appeal against the decision of the board to the Government of India in Delhi to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. Then this Miss different mission in broadcasting gives its own decision. Again if you accept that

the film was certified if not he is indicted under the law of the land to go into a writ to a court of law. Now you import almost 200 foreign films do you not. Yes we do 200 foreign feature films in addition to a large number of foreign chockfull. Now that has that has been a subject that has gone up and down I believe in 971 all foreign films were banned for a time. Yes. What was your feeling about that at that time. Well I was not a part of the censor board at that time and the decision to ban the film was not that of the Censor Board. The decision was taken for other reasons for commercial reasons because the. The country felt that it was a one way affair that the American films were coming into India and the Americans were not taking any Indian films. They wanted a reciprocal arrangement. Of course I'm not quite familiar with that band part of it but from what I know that was the main reason

why it was banned. But it was and certainly nothing to do with the certification of censorship. It wasn't banned for other reasons we were banned for commercial reasons. And what about this the general attitude toward other countries around especially the United States there was a time when American scholars found it very difficult to get visas to come to India. And when Indian students found very difficult to go abroad. For example it was for a number of years I didn't see an Indian student. But looking at it from the point of view of the director of the Central Board of Film Censors I gather that you would be enthusiastic about keeping a cultural exchange going between all countries to see have Indian films go to France in the United States in West Germany and everywhere else and to have films come in so long as they're not an intolerable number. The winds continue to blow and should continue to

blow. You know the international. After all it's the and the barriers cannot be stopped and should not be stopped and we are exposed to foreign films both after censorship and also before censorship. For example the only films shown in the international film festivals in India are without censorship and that festival is held every year now as you say. Alternate years it's the competitive festival a noncombat a festival is in nineteen seventy nine we had a competitive festival the 1980 general review and having a non-combative festival in and these festivals all the films are shown without being censored. Similarly the film societies are permitted to show films which are exempt from censorship. So in that way slowly you know moving into the international direction After all

India can't isolate itself from. As you were saying the the impact of the rest of the world. One of one of the things that is said about Indian films sort of being direct about this question you must listen to an awful lot of pop music because it has been said that an Indian film director gets two songs and then makes a film in the usual sense in most popular films are musicals and full of mythology and beloved to the nth degree by village people and by everybody else. Would you say that you do listen to an awful lot of music in reviewing Indian films. Yes again that is a part of the Indian culture culture heritage and he told us for example and it is derived not from the medium of the film it is derived from the four additions. You know the Indian theatre over the centuries. And the music was an essential part of the day. The Indian

folk theatre. Similarly other performances and the Indian film has borrowed it from the Indian cultural heritage of course. India has also got hybrid versions where the type of music has been mixed up with the music borrowed from the west. As you say music but it has a lot of Indian classical music Indian folk music and pop music I didn't mean Western music I mean the new the new songs yes the Indian genre. Yes we do have. You know I mean a mixture of you know the pop music Indian music the foreign music folk music the classical music and. But music is the one. One language that travels all over you. He does. But there have been some films without actually music's mostly in the form of songs right and

bendy duckies first came to India. You know the producers weighed with each other to put in songs taking the tradition from the theater. And one feature film had a look at what 49 songs. Goodness gracious it has been a great pleasure talking to you. Mystic and poor and I'm terribly interested in the fact that you have a very liberal and democratic view of film censorship and I think that you're probably one of the most democratic film censors and you seem to look upon film censorship with transparent regret having to do with you Hugh regretful and you hope that you can get around it somehow and therefore it's been my pleasure. For this edition from Bombay India. Bernard Reuben. The First Amendment and a free people weekly examination of civil liberties and the media in the United States and around the world.

The engineer for this broadcast was William music. The program is produced by Greg Fitzgerald. This broadcast is produced cooperatively by WGBH Boston and the Institute for democratic communication have Boston University which are solely responsible for its content. This is the station program exchange.