www.sacw.net - January 13, 2006

Film Maker Withdraws Film For the Mumbai International Film Festival To Protest Censorship

Text of the letter of withdrawal sent by film maker Saba Dewan to the Minister (Information and Broadcasting), Govt. Of India to protest continuing censorship at Miff


11 January, 2006

Shri Priya Ranjan Dasmunshi
Minister For Information and Broadcasting
Government of India, New Delhi


Dear Shri. Dasmunshi,

 I am an independent filmmaker based in Delhi and my film, Delhi- Mumbai-Delhi has been selected for the forthcoming Mumbai International Film Festival (Miff2006). I regret to inform you that I have decided to withdraw my film from the festival in protest against the insistence of the Ministry of Information & Broadcasting and the Festival organisers to retain a censorship clause in the selection process of the festival. Clause 8 allows the Festival Director to overrule the decision of the selection committee and debar a selected film from being screened. Despite several representations and protests by the film making community it still remains integral to the festival regulations.

 Under the objectionable Clause 8 of MIFF 2006, "Selection of films/videos for Competition will be made by a Committee whose decision will be final.
However, Festival Authorities reserve the right to accept or not to accept any film, if it is likely to offend the feelings and sensibilities of any country and /or promote racism or any other reason Festival Authority consider to be sufficient for acceptance or non acceptance of a film / video." 

While the festival authorities and the Ministry officials have been insisting that the Clause will not be used and there will be no censorship, it can be argued that why insist on retaining a censorship clause and taint a selection process when it will not be used. The Festival as you are aware faced international boycott in its last edition because of overt and covert censorship that saw a 'cleansing' of all films that were deemed not supporting the idea of 'India shining'. Given this scenario the festival authorities should have made the effort to win the confidence of the film making community but have instead again introduced clauses that have made the festival lose face.

 The festival authorities may argue that the Clause will not be used in the current Miff but can they provide an assurance that it will not be used in the future?  They cannot because this very clause was used in the last edition of Miff to keep out films. If the clause exists in the regulations of Miff then it can always be misused. Since the Festival is organised by an agency of the Government of India, it will always remain under pressure by the political powers of the day. It is in the interest of the international image of the festival to present itself as a space that does not practice censorship. To this end it makes little sense to retain a clause that reflects the festival's unwillingness to support an unfettered voice to the documentary film making community.

 Last year I was requested to join the organising committee of the festival but I declined because I am aware how toothless the Committee is in the absence of an independent festival director. To quote from my letter dated 10 February, 2004 of non acceptance of the position*, "...May I take this opportunity to suggest that the Ministry appoint an independent Director for the Festival to ensure the hosting of this important film gathering without any political interference. *As you are aware, the last edition of the Festival faced an international controversy for attempts to impose censorship in the selection process. An independent director who enjoys the confidence of the documentary film fraternity would go a long way in improving the image of the Festival and regaining the confidence of filmmakers internationally. Miff has the potential of becoming an important international film festival and I do hope the Ministry can introduce long term measures to make that possible."

 It is still not too late for MIFF to correct the situation. I do hope your personal intervention will allow for the forthcoming edition of the festival to be held without an accompanying set of withdrawals, resignations of jury members and an international embarrassment to the festival. Fourteen filmmakers withdrew their films from the last edition of the festival in protest against censorship. Shri Girish Karnad resigned from the jury. It is not possible for me to forget the sacrifice of my colleagues. The withdrawal of my film is in support of all those filmmakers who resisted censorship at the last Miff and with the knowledge that many will continue the protest at this edition of the festival.

 I appeal to you to order an immediate revocation of Clause 8 from the regulations of Miff2006 and steps to appoint an independent director of the festival. A formal announcement of these steps would prevent this festival from getting mired in unsavoury controversies.

Yours Sincerely,