Mirror (May 26) had been the first to report that Pahlaj Nihalani, the former chairperson of the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), had asked two filmmakers from Mumbai, Khusboo Ranka and Vinay Shukla, to get an NoC from none other than Prime Minister Narendra Modi to get their Hindi-English documentary, An Insignificant Man, passed. Produced by Anand Gandhi, the documentary chronicled the anti-corruption protests of which Anna Hazare was the face, and resulted in the birth of the Aam Aadmi Party, the NDA sweeping to power at the Centre and Arvind Kejriwal becoming the Delhi Chief Minister with a thumping majority.

When the first time filmmakers applied for certification in February, they were asked to delete all references to the BJP and the Congress and also submit NoCs from Modi, former Delhi CM Sheila Dikshit, and Kejriwal, among others. Nihalani justified his demand saying they'd used actual footage of Modi and other leaders, which cannot be shown without their permission. After six months, the duo notched up a morale-boosting victory when the Film Certification Appellate Tribunal (FCAT) in its order, asked the CBFC to issue a UA certificate to the film and held that the requirement of seeking an NoC from political personages and others as a pre-condition for certification is wholly unsustainable and not permissible by law. It has also clearly emphasized that they didn't need to mute the names of the Congress or BJP and “public interest is best served in uphold ing the Right to Freedom of Expression rather than protecting an undeserved reputation“

On the subject of the NoC, the FCAT pointed out that “there is considerable merit in the submission of the Appellant that requiring NOC from public personalities would cull the documentary cinema, rather render the making of a documentary on political scenario neigh impossible“. It also acknowledged that the Appellant in the documentary has inter alia quoted and reproduced excerpts from speeches and or taken from record events and information that is available in public domain. “In these circumstances, requiring a filmmaker to obtain NoC from the affected parties or characters in the film to whom references are made, tantamounts to the CBFC abdicating its statutory functions. This is neither desirable nor permissible at law.“

Admitting that the judgement has come as a huge relief, Khushboo is quick to add that it doesn't take away the torment they've suffered over six months to get a simple legal clearance. Vinay says that there were offers to release it on DVD or overseas but both Khushboo and he were clear they wanted to fight this because there's nothing wrong in wanting to engage with politics through cinema. “We had done due diligence in terms of legal. Had we given in to the Censor Board, it would have been a setback for other makers who wouldn't have been able to name any living politicians or use public footage. There has been so much muddying of the waters by the former chairperson saying what he was doing was by the rule book when wasn't that it was important to speak up. The FCAT has clearly said the CBFC was over-reaching its powers and could have threatened the future of documentary cinema,“ he asserts.

Vinay is optimistic of the new CBFC chief, Prasoon Joshi, but points out that we need to rethink on the system and cannot be held mercy by individuals every Friday. “At the risk of sounding rude I have to say that Prasoon cannot represent the sensibilties of an entire country. We need certification, we don't need a Censor Board,“ he maintains. “Our case has been strengthened and validated by this judgement that not only asks for no cuts but has passed it with a UA certificate as it wants young people to watch the film and engage in dialogue around political parties, elections and change.“