Empuraan: Censorship under duress

The act of self-censorship by the makers of the Malayalam movie L2: Empuraan is unusual, disturbing, and sets a bad precedent. As many as 24 cuts have been made in the film, days after it hit the screens. The film had been cleared by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) and released for viewing in theatres across the world on March 27. However, within days of its release, it ran into controversies regarding its content; it was targeted for having a “divisive political agenda” and being “anti-Hindu” and “anti-national.” It is the film’s depiction of the 2002 Gujarat violence that attracted controversy. Some of the scenes involving violence and some of the character names have been removed or changed now. Mohanlal – who plays the lead in the Prithviraj Sukumaran-directed film – has, on behalf of the film’s team, expressed regret for the “pain” the film’s contentious parts have caused to those who love him.

There was an extensive campaign against the film on social media and by leaders of the BJP and the Sangh Parivar, though the BJP, as a party, claimed that it was not part of the organised attack. RSS mouthpiece Organiser published articles strongly criticising the film. Though it is claimed that the makers opted for a new cut on their own, the pressure on them was obvious. The institutional mechanism for scrutiny and evaluation of films was rendered irrelevant and views and sentiments aligned to the ruling party and its supporters had the final endorsement. Governments, parties and leaders swear by freedom of expression but in practice, they accept the right only on their terms and in ways that suit their interests. For the BJP, the Gujarat riots are a sensitive matter and it would oppose any narrative that shows the party in poor light in connection with the violence. The message from the anti-Empuraan campaign is that the right-wing ecosystem would apply pressure, direct or indirect, to thwart any account of the riots that inconveniences the powers that be, though no open demand is made for censorship. These are, essentially, cuts on the freedom of expression.

The regret expressed by Mohanlal, apparently intended for the BJP and the Sangh Parivar, presents a grim situation – an artist was made to apologise for his art that was cleared by the relevant State institution. It is a situation where freedom of expression is claimed to exist but freedom is not ensured after its expression.