Censorship issues in Indian Cinema and the role of CBFC

Cinema in India has come a long way but still faces heavy censorship from the regulatory body CBFC. This multi-part article explores some of the censorship controversies over the years and how it impacts creative freedom.

Unnecessary obstructions to meaningful cinema

Many inspired films tackle complex social issues but face unnecessary obstruction from CBFC. Deepa Mehta’s Water brought international recognition but Hindu groups objected to scenes. It was finally released after modifications. Similarly, Lipstick Under My Burkha explored women’s sexuality in a small town but was denied certificate citing sexual scenes. However, crude comedies with vulgar content easily get clearance.

Questionable assessment standards

CBFC seems to have double standards while assessing films. Crass comedies with sexual innuendos are passed but meaningful films dealing with reality are banned. For eg, Mastizaade was cleared but Lipstick Under My Burkha was denied citing sexual content. CBFC also has issues with words like “virgin” but allows vulgar songs. This raises questions on the assessment parameters.

Prioritizing sentiments over sensibilities

While protecting sentiments is important, complete denial of sexuality and sensitive topics denies viewers choice. Not everything offensive to some will be so for all. Viewers should be treated as mature enough to choose. Banning discussions on real issues like widowhood affects social change. Promoting selective censorship culture will undermine India’s creative vision.

Hypocrisy of the chief censor

CBFC chief Pahlaj Nihalani himself produced films with double entendre songs but now denies meaningful stories. As producer, he included suggestive content but as censor denies same. This reflects deeply entrenched hypocrisy in the system that privileges prudish moral policing over creative expression.

Lack of calibrated approach

A balanced approach recognizing India’s diversity is needed. Not all regions or viewers find same things offensive. A nuanced rating/certification system enabling multiple cuts for varied audiences can address this. Complete denial reflects lack of mature and calibrated thinking in decision making.

Absence of creative experts

CBFC lacks domain expertise and diversity in its composition. It is dominated by bureaucrats and not film experts, writers or thinkers well-versed in aesthetics and creative industries. Without their viewpoint, balanced and informed decisions are difficult. This needs to change for a progressive evaluation culture.

Urgent reforms needed

While respecting all sensitivities, creative freedom is equally important. Urgent reforms are needed to make the process transparent, non-arbitrary and broaden decision makers’ profile. A rights-based approach honouring both creative visions and viewers’ choices can make CBFC relevant for new India. Unless this happens, unnecessary hindrances will undermine our soft power potential.