Ban on BBC film counter-productive

The solution lies not in shooting the messenger, not in coercing women, but in changing the male mindset and enforcing the law

It is an unenviable “lose-lose” moment and the government’s handling of the Leslee Udwin film is on expected lines. It has performed as badly as the UPA had done before. Overall, India has a pretty long and dubious record of banning books, plays, paintings and films because they upset some people somewhere.

The ban on ‘India’s Daughter’ based on Nirbhaya’s 2012 rape in Delhi is the latest in a long line.

The ban is counter-productive because it cannot work in this era of Internet. India has invited global criticism for working against free expression. For a democracy, it already has a bad record on this score. But by prosecuting Udwin, it has compounded the ‘mistake’ it made in first allowing her into the jail.

Although permission was in 2013, the present government should have tackled the fallout wisely. Blame game among the Information Ministry, the Delhi Government, the Delhi Police and the Tihar Jail authorities has only made it worse. Many questions demand answers, but nobody will answer, for fear of punishment. How was Udwin’s proposal cleared without a synopsis/script?

Is it that the authorities were mesmerised by a white filmmaker, a woman, and a Briton (read colonial mentally). How was she allowed to interview Mukesh Singh who, facing camera in normal clothes and not in jail clothes, was an under trial? Did nobody bother that statements could impact the trial? Did the authorities believe that Udwin, howsoever well-meaning, would just record the version(s) of the convict(s) and not apply her creative mind?

Having allowed the filming – whoever did it – it would have been better to allow the film, at least outside India. Those who have seen it say there is nothing vulgar. The government’s reaction is knee-jerk, in response to protests in Parliament and outside. It may have a case to justify its action for fear of street protests. The sentiments of Nirbhaya’s parents are involved. But nobody seems to be making that point.

The anger in parliament is basically that of the male chauvinists being given a national colour. Precisely from here, members have time and again talked the same things that Mukesh Singh has said. Some of our lawmakers issue unsolicited counsel, threats and diktats to women about how they should dress and move in public, who they should marry and how many children they should produce. Do they have any right to protest against the Udwin film? The reality is that what Mukesh said is also spoken by many in public life and felt by many more in this patriarchal society.

Their alarm is that India has got a bad name – it already has with Nirbhaya’s rape and subsequent death. It already has with Delhi’s Uber driver currently under trial for rape, one of the many in India that occur every 21 minutes. The solution lies, not in shooting Udwin, the messenger, not in coercing women, but in changing the male mindset and enforcing the law.

By: Mahendra Ved