{"id":188089,"date":"2017-04-17T12:21:54","date_gmt":"2017-04-17T16:21:54","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/amol-palekar-moves-sc-for-an-end-to-film-censorship-national-herald\/"},"modified":"2017-04-17T12:21:54","modified_gmt":"2017-04-17T16:21:54","slug":"amol-palekar-moves-sc-for-an-end-to-film-censorship-national-herald","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/transhuman-news-blog\/censorship\/amol-palekar-moves-sc-for-an-end-to-film-censorship-national-herald\/","title":{"rendered":"Amol Palekar moves SC for an end to film censorship &#8211; National Herald"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><p>    Actor-filmmaker Amol Palekar has reached out to the Supreme    Court for directing the government to overhaul the Film    Censorship Regime. A petition was filed on behalf of Palekar    on Monday regarding this.  <\/p>\n<p>    The petition points out that pre-censorship serves no useful    purpose in the digital age. There are no law or rules to    restrain content available on the internet; nor is there any    pre-censorship for investigative reports, stings etc., shown    over television.  <\/p>\n<p>    Then, why should a board of censors sit together to decide    whether documentaries  which are factual depictions of    real-life events  should be allowed public viewing only with    certain modifications or excisions as directed? Since    pre-censorship of films and documentaries are anachronistic to    the fundamental rights of equality and freedom of expression    enshrined in the Constitution, shouldnt Indias Board of    Censors be disbanded?  <\/p>\n<p>    These stark questions form the pith and substance of auteur    Amol Palekars challenge to the legal regime of censorship.    Based on Palekars writ petition, the Supreme Court on Monday    issued a notice to the Centre and the Central Board of Film    Certification (the Censor Board), asking for their response to    the pleas made in the petition.  <\/p>\n<p>    On September 24, 1970, in the KA Abbas case, a five-judge    Constitution bench of the Supreme Court ruled that because    cinema was a medium which could easily excite the masses and    (depending on the contents of the films) had the potential to    incite violence, rapacious acts, or other illegal actions, or    could corrupt society, there was a legal need to censor films    before they were released for public viewing.  <\/p>\n<p>    This decision is no longer in sync with the times  for it    infantalises the audience  and should be overruled, the writ    petition claims.  <\/p>\n<p>    Palekar has also contended that the film certification or    censorship regime unleashed by the Abbas ruling has turned into    an uncontrollable behemoth, which willy-nilly pulverises the    freedom of expression of some, while giving a free-hand to    others.  <\/p>\n<p>    It has also led to the creation of a parallel censorship    regime, he claims, and gives the example of Jolly LLB 2. That    film, granted a clearance by the Censor Board, had to suffer    four excisions because the Aurangabad Bench of the Bombay High    Court, acting as a predator to artistic freedom, was of the    opinion that the scenes were defamatory to the judiciary.  <\/p>\n<p>    Invoking the fundamental Right to Equality under Article 14, he    has asked why documentaries are required to carry disclaimers    and implement excisions as directed by the Censor Board, when    television programmes  which also depict real life events and    incidents  are not subjected to the same restrictions.  <\/p>\n<p>    Contending that there should be certification of films, and not    censorship, Palekar has challenged the constitutional validity    of certain provisions of the Cinematograph Act, 1952, the    Guidelines for Film Certification, 1991 and the Cinematograph    (Certification) Rules, 1983 for violating the fundamental    rights to life, equality and freedom of speech and expression.  <\/p>\n<p>    Taken together, these laws, rules and guidelines mandate that    only those films which are granted a viewer certificate should    be shown in public. If the CBFC orders that certain scenes be    modified or removed, and the director refuses to comply, then    the film in question would be stuck. Not only can it not be    screened in commercial theatres, it cannot also be shown on    television or film exhibitions.  <\/p>\n<p>    The writ petition also contends that those provisions of law    which provide for appointments of members to the CBFC, its    Revising Committees and the Film Certification Appellate    Tribunal (FCAT) be declared null and void.  <\/p>\n<p>    Instead, the Shyam Benegal Committees recommendations, which    were directed at radically reforming the censorship mechanism,    should be implemented at the earliest, the petition contends.  <\/p>\n<p><!-- Auto Generated --><\/p>\n<p>Excerpt from:<br \/>\n<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"http:\/\/www.nationalheraldindia.com\/news\/2017\/04\/17\/amol-palekar-moves-sc-for-an-end-to-film-censorship-central-board-film-certification-free-speech-expression\" title=\"Amol Palekar moves SC for an end to film censorship - National Herald\">Amol Palekar moves SC for an end to film censorship - National Herald<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p> Actor-filmmaker Amol Palekar has reached out to the Supreme Court for directing the government to overhaul the Film Censorship Regime. A petition was filed on behalf of Palekar on Monday regarding this.  <a href=\"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/transhuman-news-blog\/censorship\/amol-palekar-moves-sc-for-an-end-to-film-censorship-national-herald\/\">Continue reading <span class=\"meta-nav\">&rarr;<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":9,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[19],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-188089","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-censorship"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188089"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/9"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=188089"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/188089\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=188089"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=188089"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.euvolution.com\/prometheism-transhumanism-posthumanism\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=188089"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}