FCAT passing 'An Insignificant Man' a bittersweet victory: Dir

Image
Press Trust of India Mumbai
Last Updated : Aug 21 2017 | 5:02 PM IST
The FCAT has ordered the censor board to grant a U/A certificate to "An Insignificant Man", a documentary on the making of Aam Aadmi Party (AAP).
The directors, Khushboo Ranka and Vinay Shukla decided to move to the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) after facing issues at the examining and revising committees of the board.
The directors were apparently asked to bring NoCs (No Objection Certificates) from political leaders mentioned in the story.
"This is a bittersweet victory for us. While we have got the judgement in our favour, it has taken a long time, lot of efforts and resources. I think Mr (Pahlaj) Nihalani's tenure was controversial due to the kind of decisions he made," Ranka told PTI.
The filmmakers wanted the film to release in February this year, something that could not be possible due to certification issues with the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC).
The documentary has been granted a go-ahead just days after the appointment of adman-lyricist Prasoon Joshi as the new chairman of the board.
Asked whether Nihalani's ouster was a good sign, the director said, "Hopefully, this board will be better and more progressive. But it remains to be seen. It is too early to say anything."
The FCAT held that the requirement of seeking an NoC from political personages and others as a pre-condition for certification of the documentary is wholly unsustainable and not permissible by law, Ranka said.
She said former CBFC chairman was overreaching when he gave conservative judgements that had no legal basis or were not based on the Cinematography Act.
"The FCAT has overturned a lot of judgements of the CBFC while it was headed by Pahlaj Nihalani... It says a lot."
When asked whether filmmakers were using the board's decision for publicity, as Nihalani often claimed, Ranka said the same can be applied to him.
"He used to make arbitrary cuts in films so that he could be in news. Whatever decisions he made were overturned by a higher legal body, which means he was propagating arbitrary things. If he didn't want to be in the news, he should have stuck to the rulebook.

Disclaimer: No Business Standard Journalist was involved in creation of this content

*Subscribe to Business Standard digital and get complimentary access to The New York Times

Smart Quarterly

₹900

3 Months

₹300/Month

SAVE 25%

Smart Essential

₹2,700

1 Year

₹225/Month

SAVE 46%
*Complimentary New York Times access for the 2nd year will be given after 12 months

Super Saver

₹3,900

2 Years

₹162/Month

Subscribe

Renews automatically, cancel anytime

Here’s what’s included in our digital subscription plans

Exclusive premium stories online

  • Over 30 premium stories daily, handpicked by our editors

Complimentary Access to The New York Times

  • News, Games, Cooking, Audio, Wirecutter & The Athletic

Business Standard Epaper

  • Digital replica of our daily newspaper — with options to read, save, and share

Curated Newsletters

  • Insights on markets, finance, politics, tech, and more delivered to your inbox

Market Analysis & Investment Insights

  • In-depth market analysis & insights with access to The Smart Investor

Archives

  • Repository of articles and publications dating back to 1997

Ad-free Reading

  • Uninterrupted reading experience with no advertisements

Seamless Access Across All Devices

  • Access Business Standard across devices — mobile, tablet, or PC, via web or app

More From This Section

First Published: Aug 21 2017 | 5:02 PM IST

Next Story