Judgement
Day
By Anand
Patwardhan
24 April 2003
The Honorable
Justices H. Gokhale and R. Desai of the
Bombay High Court delivered their final verdict in the matter of the
censorship of the film "War and Peace".
It may be recalled
that the Central Board of Film Certification
(CBFC) had ordered 21 cuts in this anti-war, anti-nuclear documentary
film. The cuts included demands to delete footage depicting the assassination
of Mahatma Gandhi by Nathuram Godse, all mention of the Tehelka arms
scandal, all statements made by Dalits and all speeches by political
leaders.
We appealed
to the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) who reduced the
cuts to two and also asked for an "addition" to the film.
Aggrieved by these interventions we approached the Bombay High Court
for redress. Following his petition, the CBFC shockingly filed a petition
challenging the order of their own higher body (the FCAT) and demanding
that all 21 cuts be re-imposed.
On 5th April
during the course of arguments, the Honourable judges asked the CBFC
if they had ever in their history appealed against the orders of their
own higher authority. The answer came in the negative. The judges then
inquired as to what special interest the CBFC had in the matter of "War
and Peace" that had prompted them to challenge the order of the
FCAT. When no coherent reply was forthcoming the judges asked if the
CBFC wanted to withdraw their petition. The CBFC withdrew their petition
challenging the order of the FCAT.
What remained
in contention were the orders passed by the FCAT. The following are
some excerpts from the judgement delivered by Justices H. Gokhale and
Ranjana Desai in the matter.
Excerpts from
the Judgement
" In the
present case, the petitioner is trying to espouse
the cause of peace and against war. It is in this context of making
of this documentary that the above three scenes are incorporated
therein. It is a matter of his legitimate right to decide as to what
should be included therein and we have no hesitation in saying that
neither of the two cuts recommended are in any way justified. The Petitioner
has only recorded a demonstration in one scene and then the speech of
a Dalit leader in another. It was his choice to include both these scenes
and even what is stated by the demonstrators or in the speech of the
Dalit leader, is not conflicting with the theme of the documentary.
Similarly as far as the addition recommended is concerned, the Petitioner
submits, and in our view rightly, that the same was totally uncalled
for."
" Before
we conclude, we would like to record the oft stated
proposition that an issue may be one but there are many facets of
looking at it. It is quite possible that the persons in authority
today may feel that what they see is the only correct facet of it
though it may not be so. It is only in a democratic form of
government that the citizens have the right to express themselves
fully and fearlessly as to what is their view point towards the
events which are taking place around. By suppressing certain view point,
it is not only the propagator of the view point who suffers but it is
the society at large and equally the people in authority who suffer.
This is because they fail to receive the counter view and it may eventually
lead to an immense damage to society due to erroneous decision at the
hands of the persons in authority in the absence of the counter view.
That apart, the freedom of speech and expression is important not merely
for the consequences that ensue in the absence thereof but since the
negation of it runs as an anti-thesis to basic human values, instincts
and creativity. It is high time that the persons in authority realize
the significance of freedom of speech and expression rather than make
and allow such attempts to stifle it."
I am deeply
grateful to Advocate P.A. Sebastian who fought the case in the Bombay
High Court, to Ms Nitya Ramakrishna and M.S. Ganesh who earlier represented
the film before the FCAT in New Delhi and to the thousands of well wishers
across the country and globe. We believe that this judgement will be
a shot in the arm for all democratic and secular forces and for artists,
writers, journalists and filmmakers in particular as it re-establishes
the right to freedom of expression as guaranteed by our Constitution.