Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human rights states that,” Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers”. It is the fundamental human right that enables us to praise, criticise or question the world around us. Article 19 in the Indian constitution states that
All citizens shall have the right—
(a) To freedom of speech and expression;
(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms; (c) to form associations or unions;(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India; (e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;(f) omitted by the …show more content…
Dismissing objections by the censor board which had wanted 89 cuts, the court said the film must be certified for release in the next 48 hours, ordering one cut and a removal of disclaimer. The film board had said they thought the movie portrayed Punjab in a bad light. The proposed cuts included removing every mention of the word "Punjab" from the film, deleting swear words and also a number of other words such as "parliament", "legislators" and "elections". The court also observed that the role of CBFC is not to censor, but certify the films. Given are two of the contemporary examples of outrush that followed the strict censorship laws in India. All these are undertaken for the sake of ‘public good’ and to maintain peace and tranquillity, without knowing that it essentially curbs the freedom of speech and expression not …show more content…
The most common filter the censor board in India uses is that of “morality”. People argue for and against being on moral grounds without even understanding what is morality. Who defines morality? What is the measure scale through which we measure it? Who all are considered as immoral? If at all there is someone who has defined it and the society blindly accepts it, without thinking about it further. In most of the cases we all are simply blind about it. It comes along with the process of interpellation, proposed by Althusser. Interpellation is the process in which ideologies “call out” to “hail” people and offer a particular identity, which they accept as “neutral” or “obvious”. There are no individuals in interpellation, only subjects. By this way the dominant ideology exerts power on the others and drives them to think in that particular manner. With the given abstraction that surrounds the dominant notions created through power asymmetry, it is clear that there are external influences that limit the freedom of speech and expression in cinema through the censor
All citizens shall have the right—
(a) To freedom of speech and expression;
(b) to assemble peaceably and without arms; (c) to form associations or unions;(d) to move freely throughout the territory of India; (e) to reside and settle in any part of the territory of India;(f) omitted by the …show more content…
Dismissing objections by the censor board which had wanted 89 cuts, the court said the film must be certified for release in the next 48 hours, ordering one cut and a removal of disclaimer. The film board had said they thought the movie portrayed Punjab in a bad light. The proposed cuts included removing every mention of the word "Punjab" from the film, deleting swear words and also a number of other words such as "parliament", "legislators" and "elections". The court also observed that the role of CBFC is not to censor, but certify the films. Given are two of the contemporary examples of outrush that followed the strict censorship laws in India. All these are undertaken for the sake of ‘public good’ and to maintain peace and tranquillity, without knowing that it essentially curbs the freedom of speech and expression not …show more content…
The most common filter the censor board in India uses is that of “morality”. People argue for and against being on moral grounds without even understanding what is morality. Who defines morality? What is the measure scale through which we measure it? Who all are considered as immoral? If at all there is someone who has defined it and the society blindly accepts it, without thinking about it further. In most of the cases we all are simply blind about it. It comes along with the process of interpellation, proposed by Althusser. Interpellation is the process in which ideologies “call out” to “hail” people and offer a particular identity, which they accept as “neutral” or “obvious”. There are no individuals in interpellation, only subjects. By this way the dominant ideology exerts power on the others and drives them to think in that particular manner. With the given abstraction that surrounds the dominant notions created through power asymmetry, it is clear that there are external influences that limit the freedom of speech and expression in cinema through the censor