Asserting
that
the
government
in
power
has
no
role
in
film
certification,
veteran
director
Shyam
Benegal
on
Friday
said
filmmakers'
concerns
over
the
Centre's
proposal
to
amend
the
Cinematograph
Act
are
"natural".
On
June
18,
the
Centre
had
sought
public
comments
on
the
draft
Cinematograph
(Amendment)
Bill
2021
which
proposes
to
penalise
film
piracy
with
a
jail
term
and
fine,
introduce
age-based
certification,
and
empower
the
Central
government
to
order
recertification
of
an
already
certified
film
following
receipt
of
complaints.
Several
industry
veterans,
including
actors
and
filmmakers,
have
called
the
proposal
a
"blow
to
the
film
fraternity" as
they
believe
it
will
potentially
endanger
freedom
of
expression
and
democratic
dissent
in
their
letter
to
the
Information
and
Broadcasting
Ministry
on
Friday.
Benegal,
who
headed
a
committee
to
take
a
holistic
look
at
the
functioning
of
the
Central
Board
of
Film
Certification
(CBFC)
and
submitted
its
report
to
the
I&B
Ministry
in
2016,
said
the
proposed
amendment
doesn't
make
sense.
"I
don't
understand
why
this
has
come
up
in
the
first
place.
I
am
actually
at
a
loss,
thinking
what
exactly
is
the
point
of
this.
Unless
they
want
to
hold
on
to
and
have
chosen
to
function
the
way
they
want...
to
have
control
over
the
media.
We
are
a
democratic
country,
our
media
is
supposed
to
be
free,"
Benegal
told
PTI.
The
veteran
said
when
there's
already
an
existing
system
of
the
CBFC,
there
should
be
no
outside
control,
especially
by
the
government.
he
said,
"The
government
in
this
case
has
no
role
to
play
because
they've
already
set
up
a
system-
the
CBFC.
So
why
is
there
a
need
for
the
government
to
come
back
into
it?
Naturally,
the
filmmakers
would
be
worried
that
why
is
the
government
so
concerned.
When
there
are
well
laid
out
principles,
under
which
cinema,
TV
are
already
covered,
now
why
do
you
have
to
come
into
it,
particularly
the
government
in
power?
People,
opposition
parties
all
will
be
concerned
because
it's
a
power
you're
not
supposed
to
exercise.
What's
the
point
of
having
an
amendment?"
The
Benegal-led
committee
had
recommended
that
there
should
be
no
system
of
imposing
excisions,
modifications
and
changes
to
a
film
and
that
the
CBFC
should
function
purely
as
a
certification
body.
Benegal,
however,
said
he
has
"no
idea"
about
the
current
status
of
the
report
or
if
the
suggestions
were
ever
implemented.
The
86-year-old
filmmaker
said
it's
unclear
how
much
the
current
proposal
to
amend
the
Cinematograph
Act
has
taken
from
the
recommendations
of
the
committee.
"When
you
are
doing
a
report,
it's
contextual.
But
if
you
take
it
out
of
context
and
use
it
for
your
own...
To
find
a
solution
to
a
problem,
you
take
a
little
bit
of
this
and
that.
It
can
be
canablised,"
he
said.
The
letter
to
the
I&B
ministry,
signed
by
more
than
3000
people
including
names
such
as
Vishal
Bhardwaj,
Anurag
Kashyap,
Shabana
Azmi
said
the
Cinematograph
(Amendment)
Bill
2021
must
clearly
define
the
role
of
the
CBFC
as
a
body
which
certifies
film
content
for
public
exhibition
and
not
as
a
censoring
body.
"We
recommend
that
the
amendments
giving
powers
to
the
Central
government
to
revoke
a
film
certificate
must
be
dropped,"
the
letter
read.
Benegal
said
there
is
a
provision
in
the
existing
act,
where
the
government
can
recall
a
film
if
it's
"blatantly
unconstitutional"
or
"threatens"
national
integrity.
But
that
can
also
be
interpreted
as
being
"anti-government",
which
would
be
troubling,
he
said.
"Ultimately,
the
abiding
institution
of
the
country
would
be
the
Constitution.
It
guarantees
many
things,
including
freedom
of
expression.
You
can
do
a
lot
of
things
but
even
then
there
are
certain
provisions,
it
doesn't
mean
you
can
go
and
step
on
your
neighbour's
toes.
"There
are
certain
conditions
under
which
you're
not
likely
to
get
any
certificate
whatsoever-
if
there's
a
perception
that
the
film
is
going
to
threaten
national
integrity,
nobody
will
allow
you
to
do
that.
But,
that
can
also
be
interpreted
by
the
government
in
power
as
being
against
the
government,
even
if
it
isn't."
The
filmmaker
said
the
possibility
of
stifling
dissent
would
naturally
be
alarming.
"I
can
be
critical
of
a
lot
of
things,
including
the
way
the
government
is
functioning,
but
if
you're
going
to
be
intolerant
to
that,
what's
my
recourse?
Those
are
things
that
people
would
naturally
be
concerned
about,"
he
added.