Stand down, CBFC

Only BJP veteran L.K. Advani has protested that they were infringing on the turf of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).

India teems with censors — petty political functionaries, obscure lawyers and far-flung nativists in search of their 15 seconds of fame. Then there’s the empire of hurt sentiments, made up of common people who are genuinely (though unreasonably) agitated by some cultural product and seethe until someone does something about it. And now there’s Parliament, whose standing committee on information technology has examined Sanjay Leela Bhansali, director of the yet unreleased Padmavati, from all possible angles.

Only BJP veteran L.K. Advani has protested that they were infringing on the turf of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC). Other parliamentarians were happy to probe the director to see what gives, and to ask if it is legitimate for a filmmaker to depict sati, a banned practice. This is a fine opportunity to deepen the question and ask if it is okay to depict Nazism, since it is a globally banned and abhorred ideology. It has been depicted in some of the world’s favourite films, from The Great Dictator to Schindler’s List and Life is Beautiful. Someone should do something about it.

But that entity is certainly not the CBFC. Historically, it was noted for an obsession with bad language — which is what everyone heard on the street — and an inexplicable urge to sheathe dancers in body stockings. Today, when films are being borrowed for agitprop by political and social groups, it has been inclined far too often to side with the mob. It has itself become so controversial that it adds fuel to fires lit by clever self-promoters. But fortunately, there is no dearth of freelance censors in India. The CBFC should bow to weightier competition and leave censorship to the people and their representatives in Parliament.