7th December 2013

Respected Minister,
We are writing to you to bring to your attention the vision, achievements and concerns of
the CBFC Chairperson and the Board during a period that has been extremely significant for the
CBFC. The Chairperson was appointed in April 2011, and the Board in May of that year, and
since then we have been committed to streamlining and updating the processes of film
certification allowing for an openness and freedom of expression while remaining extremely
sensitive to crucial issues and concerns relating to social and gender inequities and injustices,
community sensitivities, as well as national security concerns.
Almost at the very beginning of the tenure of this Chairperson and the Board, the
Chairperson, in June 2011 at an interactive session in Mumbai which was aptly called Samvaad
delivered her Vision statement before the members of the film industry, officials of the Ministry
of I & B, the public and the other stakeholders with a view to underline the shift in the profile of
the CBFC from an earlier conception of a censoring agency to one that primarily does
classification of films as per the Cinematograph Act, 1952. This was a historic attempt to open a
dialogue and to ensure that the trust deficit that had been built up over the years was addressed.
We made a commitment to the stakeholders that the Board would make a genuine attempt to
ensure that the certification process was transparent, efficient and in tune with contemporary
global standards, so that our film content is at par with developments and standards all over the
world. This was welcomed by all, including the Ministry and Ministry officials who took part in
the interactive session Samvaad and ensured the Board their support, and for the last two and a
half years we at the CBFC [the Chairperson, the Board members and the CEO] have been
working tirelessly to ensure that we deliver what we promised. Our attempts to computerize the
certification process, to make the censor certificate look less complicated and more audience
friendly, to make the logo of CBFC representative of the openness of the system, to suggest
changes in the Cinematograph Act so that it caters to the changing technology and changing
standards of our society have all been a part of our endeavour to make CBFC an organization
that the audience and the film makers can relate to and can rely upon.
Since 2011 we have been working towards making our vision a reality with optimism,
enthusiasm and determination. Together we believed that we would be able to make a difference
from within; that we would be able to change the interpretation of the guidelines, and generally
institutionalize a more progressive, liberal and contemporary way of certification / classification
that would promote freedom of creative expression with social responsibility. In short, we came
in with a certain reformist zeal in tune with our vision as outlined in that first Samvaad in June
2011. We have had success as well with the certification process: several films certified by us
have been landmark films and we have had some landmark judgments passed in favour of
freedom of expression. We have attempted to impart a sense of transparency in the workings of
the CBFC, and we believe we have made a good start on the need to sharpen certification and the
need to strengthen the processes. We have also committed to initiating discussions with Panel
members to deepen and clarify their understanding of their own role and that of the Board
members and officials of the CBFC. We wanted to initiate with them debates and discussions on
the significance of cinema, its signifying procedures and narrative structures, and the
communicative power of this extremely powerful medium that needs careful handling. To that
end, some of us who teach cinema and related subjects in colleges and universities in India and
1

abroad were entrusted with the responsibility of developing training / refresher modules for panel
members across the regional centres of CBFC which we formulated so that a wider discussion
could be initiated on these issues with the Panel members. We have had a couple of very
interesting and exciting interactions with them in different centres; we started with Bangalore
and followed it up with Delhi. Panel members attended these modules in large numbers so did
the film makers. We were certain of achieving the same degree of success in other centres too.
The confidence came from the fact that the interactive sessions called Samvaads that CBFC had
been holding for the past three years across India had become immensely popular among the
audience, the filmmakers, the trade bodies and chambers as well as with other stakeholders like
the Animal Welfare Board of India, NGOs dealing with womens and childrens issues, and other
organizations.
However, even as we look back and feel that we have made an important beginning
towards our articulated goals that we believe will make a big difference to the processes of film
certification and classification, encourage the growth of the film industry in the right directions
and go a long way in building mature audiences across the country, we have concerns about the
difficulties and obstacles to the realization of our goals. We are writing to make you aware of
these and solicit your support and that of the Ministrys to enable the CBFC to become a model
organization of the Govt of India. It is with these intentions that we would like to raise certain
crucial issues with you in this, the Centenary year of Indian cinema.
We were hoping that the new Cinematograph Bill 2010 would get enacted during this
landmark year, and while that has not yet happened, we hope that the same would happen sooner
than later. We also hope that the new Act will give more teeth to the CBFC. At the moment,
while it is laid down legally that the CBFC certificate is binding and must be upheld, any state
government can challenge the certificate and take decisions that go against the certification and
set the entire process at naught. The Mudgal Committee has made its recommendations in this
regard and we hope States banning or delaying the exhibition of certified films would become
history.
For the CBFC to become an effective body, it is important that the Board, the Panel
members and the CBFC officials and the Ministry of I & B all work together and in tandem.
Any real or perceived difference of opinion among these makes all the concerned parties
vulnerable to unjustified attacks by interest groups and individuals with motivated intentions. We
became victims of such an attack in the recent past and the media had a field day playing it up. It
caused a great deal of embarrassment to all of us, one that is neither good for the CBFC and nor
is it desirable for the Ministry of I & B.
Conceptually, the CBFC has been envisioned as an autonomous body that comprises of a
group of professionals from different areas allied and related to cinema who are brought
together to make the policies that the CBFC then implements. While the constitutional status of
CBFC is that of a subordinate office under the administrative control of the Ministry of I & B,
the functioning and the decision making regarding film certification have to be independent of
any Government or non-governmental influence. It is the bounden duty of the Chairperson and
the Board to ensure that this independence of the CBFC is not only maintained, but is also
perceived as being maintained. We are under the constant scrutiny of local and international
media and any perceived interference in the working of the Board would be detrimental to the
2

image of the Government. We are acutely aware of that and we guard our independence with
great zeal.
To achieve greater transparency and more objectivity in the working of CBFC, it is
crucial that the Board Members, Advisory Panel Members and the officers of the Board are
selected with utmost care. Greater representation of the film industry on the Board will enable a
form of self-governance that will go a long way to minimize the confrontation between the two
that had for long been the nature of their interaction. However, it is not just industry insiders who
must come on the Board. Educated, professional people with backgrounds in film, media,
culture, the arts, journalism, law, education in different fields, and people with integrity are
important. We believe that this Board has such individuals who have taken their appointment
seriously and are attempting to make a difference to film culture and the institutional processes
that oversee one of the most powerful mediums of modernity.
The day to day functioning of the CBFC is handled by CBFC officials and the Panel
members. And it is here that the choice of the panel members and officials is extremely
important. Background and qualifications should be very significant, for it is the Panel members
who watch and certify films on a daily basis. CBFC certifies Hollywood films too and it is often
a challenge to get panel members who know the language enough to suggest cuts or advise
ratings. The media has in the recent past highlighted the incompetence of the Panel members in
judging films and we have found it difficult to respond to questions raised by local and foreign
media. It is crucial then that the Advisory Panel members have some exposure to films, the arts,
social and institutional processes and are able to understand and respond to the issues that
cinema raises. It is in this sense that sensitivity to social, cultural and artistic issues and a sense
of responsibility to the task at hand is absolutely crucial for the Panel members. Their selection is
therefore an onerous task, and honest, intelligent and aware members should be appointed to the
Advisory Panels. It is also important that Advisory Panel members understand the nature of their
appointment, and do not inflate their own importance or see their role in a self-aggrandizing
manner printing visiting cards with this appointment or demanding favours from the film
industry in exchange for their role in certification.
We feel that a few measures that should be put into effect immediately would go a long
way in ensuring that some of the crises that the CBFC has had to face recently would be avoided,
and the process of certification streamlined. We outline here a few of these:
i)

ii)

The selection of the Advisory Panel members to be in consonance with a clear vision
of the CBFC as a body that has a serious responsibility to society at the same time as
it must ensure creative and artistic freedom. The Act allows the Chairperson and the
Board to play a role in the nomination process, and we feel that this is an important
point that the government must accept. If the Chairperson and the Board can
nominate two-thirds of the members to these Advisory Panels, the government must
accept this because it is only then that the selection of qualified and representative
members will be ensured. So far, this has not been done.
The selection of members to these Panels must have a term limit. Two consecutive
terms is acceptable and three should be the absolute outer limit, so that fresh thinking
and change are given a chance. It is important that more and more sectors of the
social body are represented on these Panels and that more people and younger people
3

are also given an opportunity to be members of these Panels. Limited tenures are
therefore important to ensure wider social representation and participation, as well as
to ensure that the processes of film certification are receptive to social changes and
different and multiple viewpoints and does not stultify into rigid and conservative
responses.
Orientation and training / refresher courses are extremely significant in order to
ensure that Panel members are aware of their own roles, the expectations that the
CBFC has of them and most significantly that cinema literacy is inculcated. To this
end, this Board and its sub-committee has devised training modules and refresher
courses /workshops that have already been tested and has generated extremely
significant responses and initiated dialogues about cinema and its role that is very
important. The significance and value of frequent training cannot be underestimated,
and dialogues through workshop modules will ensure greater participation. These
refresher courses / training modules must be conceived, formulated and conducted by
those among the Board members who have teaching experience and have been
involved either with film education or are journalists / media professionals who are
familiar with public address. In the future if the Board does not have such members
[which probably will not be the case], those who have been involved in formulating
these courses and other professionals may be called in to conduct these refresher
courses / training modules.
Funds for these workshops are essential and we hope the Ministry would ensure these
funds are released in time as per the training schedule approved by the Board.

iii)

iv)

The third pillar of the CBFC is the office itself and the different officials who are
involved in the running of the office and in the daily certification process. The CEO, the
ROs, the AROs, and the office staff are all extremely significant and as with the Board
members and the Panel members, the selection and training of these officials is absolutely
essential. While making these appointments it is crucial that along with their backgrounds in
government administration, a familiarity with some form of art is kept in mind. It is
extremely important to understand that it is not just administrative experience and efficiency
that is required, but that cinema literacy is crucially significant for this sector as well. In
order to ensure that cinema literacy is ensured, these officials must also participate in the
refresher courses and training modules. Only those who have undergone some training
either through the FTII/ NFAI Film Appreciation course or the Refresher courses / Training
modules conducted by the CBFC should be given the responsibility of certifying films. We
outline below a few points that have bearing on this issue:
i)

ii)

Office staff or junior officers who are officiating as AROs and have no experience
in film certification or any cinema literacy should not be given the responsibility
of certifying controversial films. In other words, training of junior staff is also
extremely important, and those handling only administrative work at the CBFC
should not be considered for film certification unless they have been trained.
Sensitive films must be examined by the senior most officer. The CEO or the RO
should be held responsible in case a sensitive film is examined by inexperienced
or junior officers.

iii)

iv)

v)

In order to ensure that vested interests are not at work, it is important that the
Chairperson/ CEO have the power to over-rule the programming decisions taken
by the RO or the ARO in case the need to do so is felt. Panels must be drawn up
keeping the sensitivity of the films in mind and it should be ensured by the senior
officers that there is mobility and circulation, and that the same people arent
called in again and again to review films.
Officials of the CBFC should not be allowed to talk to the Press. The same stands
true for the Advisory panel members too. Disciplinary action should be taken
against the panel members and officers for flouting the rules and speaking to the
media which more often than not leads to speculation and spread of
misinformation. It damages the image of the organization as well as that of the
Ministry. The Chairperson may authorize the CEO or the Spokesperson of the
Board to interact with the media.
To maintain impartiality and transparency, all those officers of the CBFC who
certify films must be transferred regularly from one office to another. The Board
has observed that some Examining Officers of the CBFC who have worked in one
office for over a decade have developed vested interests and considerable clout
among the censor agents who represent film makers. These elements develop
cliques and indulge in petty rivalries which vitiate the overall atmosphere of the
office. Besides no other government organization allows people handling
sensitive work to remain at one place for interminably long periods during their
service tenure.

At this point, we would now like to turn to certain suggestions that we have about
processes which need urgent intervention. In order to realize both the long term and the short
term goals of the CBFC and to ensure that the procedures of the CBFC are fair and transparent
and that they appear to be so we suggest that:
i)
ii)
iii)

iv)

The long delayed On-line system of certification should be implemented and that
the Ministry ensures that the ROs are computer savvy. Some of the current ROs
are not comfortable working on computers.
Our suggestion that the name of the CBFC be changed to the Indian Board of
Film Certification since the word Central does not have any significance in a
global context should be accepted.
The finalization of a new logo has been stuck due to the inability of the CBFC to
approach designers who are not part of a government set up. A new and
innovative approach to being able to access creative individuals in the field is
required and we urge the government to help CBFC get the right person to design
a new Logo that truly represents the functions and the attitude of the CBFC.
We have discussed the cause of the documentary film-maker who does not have
the financial ability of the mainstream film-makers and yet passionately commits
to exploring critical social issues despite lack of distribution and exhibition
facilities. We propose that there should be different categorization and a different
payment structure for documentary films which will make it easier for these filmmakers to continue making films that address significant social, cultural and
political issues.
5

v)

vi)

vii)

Our suggestion that the constitution of the Advisory Panels be done with great
care and that suitable people are selected for this extremely important task should
be accepted by the Ministry. The Act suggests that the Chairperson and the Board
should nominate two thirds of the members on these panels and this provision
must be respected by the Ministry. Unless we address this absolutely crucial issue,
the certification process is going to continue to face immense difficulties.
There are serious issues about certification and conversion of A rated films for
television that we have not been able to solve. We need the Ministry to be open to
discussion on these crucial issues primary among them being the need to initiate
a sensible and much-needed move like introducing a 'mature' hour on satellite TV.
For this, it is important that the Ministry bring together all the stakeholders onto
the same platform so that procedures can be worked out the Ministry, the CBFC,
the BCCC, the film industry and the IBF( the broadcasters ).
In a meeting with the film industry, we had proposed that a Joint Committee with
representatives of the film industry be set up to frame the guidelines for the latenight slot on television. This is an idea that the industry had accepted at that point
though there has not been any progress since. It was believed then that the
framework formulated by this joint committee would serve to inform decisions on
films which qualify for that slot, that this would be a mature step for the
certification process and that a lot of filmmakers would begin to accept this as a
step forward. In time, this slot would become an accepted norm, and even the
broadcasters would begin to see this as a boon. Most significantly, this would
enable that television content could cater to mature audiences at a suitable time.
This is an idea that has not had a chance to develop and we feel that it needs
support, and that this is a chance to bring the industry on board, and make them
participate in discussions about the processes of certification. In any case this
would be a forum where diverse views could be aired and potential differences of
opinion could also be potentially solved. We would like this idea to develop and
for the Ministry to accept this suggestion as a positive intervention and help us
take it forward.

And finally, we urge that the Ministry take the CBFC and its Board seriously, have a
greater interaction with us, and be open to listening to the issues that we are raising. We
would like to keep you updated on important issues through the Chairperson. We thank
you for reposing your faith in us and for making us partners in the process of updating
the procedures required to classify films and make them relevant in a global
contemporary environment.
Looking forward to a positive response from you to our concerns,
Respectfully,
Anjum Rajabali
Arundhati Nag

Ira Bhaskar
K Sekhar Babu
Lora Prabhu
Mamang Dai
M.K. Raina
Nikhil Alva
Pankaj Sharma
Pankaj Vohra
Rajeev Masand
Santokh Singh Chaudhary
Shaji Karun
Shubhra Gupta
T.G.Thyagarajan