In September, Tamil actor Vishal made headlines by alleging a bribe payment of ₹6.5 lakh to the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) for clearance of the Hindi version of his film, Mark Antony.
Two months later, a significant change occurred at the CBFC, with CEO Ravinder Bhakar stepping down and Smita Vats Sharma assuming his position.
The controversy surrounding Mark Antony was just one factor contributing to Bhakar's ouster, with allegations of widespread corruption within the CBFC system surfacing during the subsequent investigation.
CBFC members were found doubling up as middlemen, accepting hefty sums in exchange for censor certificates. This revelation prompted the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting to initiate a deeper inquiry.
The recent uproar over the film Animal added to the pressure for reform. The Ranbir Kapoor-starrer, criticized for its violence and misogyny, received only five changes and an 'A' certificate, raising concerns about a lopsided certification approach. The ongoing investigation aims to address these issues, and further changes within the CBFC are anticipated.
The Animal incident also underscores the void left by the dissolution of the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) in 2021. Filmmakers now lack a streamlined process for appealing objections and cuts imposed by the CBFC, as the FCAT previously offered timely resolutions at minimal costs. The absence of the FCAT has led filmmakers to resort to legal routes, potentially causing delays in film releases.
The need for an effective appellate system becomes apparent, especially when examining cases like Animal, where objections raised during certification could have been resolved efficiently by the FCAT, preserving the film's release timeline.
The current situation raises questions about the ability of High Courts to match the speed and efficiency of the now-defunct FCAT, emphasizing the importance of revisiting the role and structure of film certification bodies.
