Kerala CM Pinarayi Vijayan defends IFFK against censorship and Centre’s interference

The recent controversy surrounding the International Film Festival of Kerala (IFFK) and the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting's denial of censor exemptions to 19 films brings to the forefront critical issues concerning freedom of expression, federal relations, and cultural autonomy in India. Kerala Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan's strong criticism, labeling the Centre's actions as an 'assault on freedom of expression' and 'anti-democratic,' underscores the deep ideological and political fissures that often emerge in the cultural sphere.

To understand this incident, it's crucial to grasp the background of film censorship in India. The Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC), a statutory body under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting, is responsible for certifying films for public exhibition in India under the Cinematograph Act, 1952. While films screened at international film festivals in India often receive exemptions from this certification process, allowing a wider range of global cinema to be showcased without undergoing the full censorship scrutiny, these exemptions are not automatic and are granted by the I&B Ministry. The IFFK, established in 1996, is a prominent cultural event, recognized internationally, and has a tradition of showcasing diverse and often challenging cinema.

What precisely happened was that for the 28th edition of IFFK, the Union Ministry of I&B denied censor exemptions to 19 films. This decision meant that these films, despite being selected for an international festival, would either have to go through the lengthy and potentially restrictive CBFC certification process or be dropped from the festival lineup. The Kerala Chief Minister, Pinarayi Vijayan, viewed this as a deliberate act of interference and an attempt to stifle artistic freedom and expression, particularly given the festival's established reputation for curating a broad spectrum of films, many of which might not be suitable for general commercial release but are vital for cultural discourse.

Several key stakeholders are involved. The **Kerala Chief Minister and the State Government** are champions of cultural autonomy and state rights, viewing the Centre's action as an encroachment. The **Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting** and the **CBFC** represent the central authority responsible for regulating media content, ostensibly to uphold public order, decency, and national security, as per the Cinematograph Act. The **IFFK organizers** and the **filmmaking community** are directly impacted, advocating for artistic freedom and minimal state interference in cultural programming. The **public**, particularly film enthusiasts and those concerned with civil liberties, are also significant stakeholders, observing how these events shape the cultural landscape.

This issue matters profoundly for India for several reasons. Firstly, it reignites the debate around **freedom of speech and expression**, a fundamental right guaranteed by **Article 19(1)(a)** of the Indian Constitution. While **Article 19(2)** allows for 'reasonable restrictions' on this right in the interests of public order, decency, morality, etc., the interpretation of 'reasonable' often becomes a point of contention. Critics argue that denying exemptions to films specifically curated for a festival, without clear justification, goes beyond reasonable restriction and borders on censorship. Secondly, it highlights strains in **Centre-State relations**, a cornerstone of Indian federalism. Cultural matters, while often seen as concurrent, frequently become battlegrounds for political ideologies, with states asserting their autonomy against perceived central overreach. The subject of