.jpeg)
Recently, the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) asked the makers of Aamir Khan’s upcoming movie Sitaare Zameen Par to include a quote by Prime Minister Narendra Modi in the film’s opening disclaimer. This unusual request has raised serious concerns about the state of free speech in India, especially when the addition appears unrelated to the film’s content or message.
The Constitution of India guarantees every citizen the right to freedom of speech and expression under Article 19(1)(a). This includes the right of artists and filmmakers to express their ideas freely. However, this right is subject to reasonable restrictions under Article 19(2), in the interests of public order, morality, decency, and national security.
But one must ask—does inserting a political quote into a film's disclaimer fall under these reasonable restrictions?
In this case, the CBFC ordered five changes to the film. The most controversial among them is the insertion of a quote by the Prime Minister about the year 2047. The rationale behind this inclusion remains unclear, especially since the film revolves around a basketball coach mentoring intellectually challenged students. The CBFC also demanded other changes, such as replacing “business woman” with “business person,” removing the word “kamal” (lotus), and changing “Michael Jackson” to “Lovebirds” in the subtitles.
These directives raise a larger question: should a certification board have the authority to enforce edits that are neither offensive nor contextually relevant? While the CBFC is tasked with certifying films based on age-appropriateness and public sensibilities, it is not meant to dictate narrative direction or insert political endorsements. Compelling filmmakers to include specific quotes, particularly those with political overtones, can risk turning art into propaganda.
In a functioning democracy, freedom of expression is essential to nurturing diverse opinions and fostering creativity. If artists begin fearing political consequences, they may start avoiding complex or sensitive subjects altogether. The power of cinema lies in its ability to reflect, question, and challenge. Political neutrality in art ensures that films remain an extension of the creator’s vision, not the state’s messaging apparatus.
Moreover, inserting a political quote in a film’s disclaimer is not just a symbolic gesture. It subtly primes the audience and alters their perception, consciously or otherwise. This kind of state-sanctioned messaging infringes on artistic independence and creates a chilling effect, where self-censorship becomes the norm.
Such decisions also set a worrying precedent. Today, it might be a quote. Tomorrow, it could be a mandatory scene or theme. The line between certification and ideological control must not be blurred. The CBFC must operate transparently and within its constitutional limits.
In conclusion, while it is the government's role to regulate content in the interest of public welfare, this power must not be misused to insert political ideology into creative works. Freedom of expression is a cornerstone of Indian democracy. Undermining it through indirect censorship not only weakens the film industry but also chips away at the democratic fabric of the nation itself.
Let cinema continue to be a mirror to society, not a megaphone for political messaging.
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
