New Delhi: The announcement that the release of the Vivek Oberoi-starrer biopic drama on Prime Minister Narendra Modi has been brought forward by a week, to April 5, has raised many eyebrows. The film will now be released before phase one voting.
PM Narendra Modi is reported to be a flattering portrayal of the prime minister’s career, and could have an impact on voters or even be seen as campaign material. However, according to former chief election commissioners, the film’s release passes the litmus test of legality and does not go against the model code of conduct.
This movie and others of its kind released this year have irked political watchers, who believe they may provide undue benefits to big parties and leaders, whose supporters can afford to commission movies of this kind.
Movies can also be used to target political opponents. Take, for instance, The Tashkent Files. The film, starring Naseeruddin Shah and produced by BJP-loyalist Vivek Agnihotri, depicts the circumstances in which former Prime Minister Lal Bahadur Shastri died in Tashkent in 1965. Shastri’s family has often alleged a conspiracy and the involvement of Congress leaders in his death. The movie is slated for release on April 12.
In this election year, three films that are either biopics or based on recent historical incidents with political ramifications have been released: Ronnie Screwvala’s Anupam Kher-starrer The Accidental Prime Minister and the Nawazuddin Siddiqui-starrer Thackeray .
Rights activists have argued that given their political nature, this films need to be monitored closely, especially if their release is scheduled when the model code of conduct is in place.
Biopics on Modi, Manmohan and Thackeray too close to reality
Venkatesh Nayak of the Commonwealth Human Rights Initiative said in earlier times too, biopics of political leaders were made. In the 1970s, there was Aandhi, which many believed was based on Indira Gandhi. But there were many differences in the what the movie portrayed and her real life.
‘But of late,’ he said, ‘there seems to be a new crop of filmmakers who are picking up lives of politicians or particular episodes from contemporary history and they are making films. Recently, PM Narendra Modi is being portrayed by Vivek Oberoi and Anupam Kher portrayed Manmohan Singh. These films are too close to reality.’
He said while these movie can certainly pass off as creative enterprise, ‘the Election Commission should be reviewing them especially if they have people or parts easily recognisable from recent memory and if they are all essentially from the political arena’.
The EC, he said, should see if these films are being released at a time when they can influence voters. ‘The law is right now silent on this. But the Commission should keep a watch. It can perform this task in coordination with the Central Board of Film Certification. The EC can decide on the political perception and the CBFC members the artistic and creative perception. This is also required only for the period when the model code of conduct is in force.’
Nayak added that ‘pre-censorship is not permissible under the Indian law’ and so ‘there will have to be a reason as to why such films will not be exhibited publicly.’
Unlike programmes that are telecast on television where time is allocated to political parties and therefore no one can claim any favouritism, Nayak said that a level playing field is not available to all when it comes to films.
‘Small and regional parties will simply not be able to meet these kind of challenges or commission films that are similarly grand and get released simultaneously in so many theatres.’
Former CECs differ
Several former chief election commissioners The Wire spoke to insisted that under the existing law, the release of films cannot be stopped when the model code of conduct is in force. But they said objections can be raised and the matter examined.
Former CEC N. Gopalaswami said, ‘Possibly at this juncture some objection could be there.’
On the other hand, V.S. Sampath noted it was important to first see the movie before forming an opinion. ‘It will be like shooting in the dark to say anything without seeing the movie.’
He also noted that ‘there is no restriction on release of movies’ or when a movie is released. ‘I don’t think there is any model code which bans that.’
Sampath said there can only be cause for action if ‘someone can establish that this has been done to give publicity to that person or to the party to which he belongs.’
As for an advisory to producers to not release their movies too close to elections, he said that is something which should have been done much earlier. ‘But not now as it would appear that you are trying to react to a particular situation by way of a general policy.’
Former CEC S.Y. Quraishi also concurred that the EC has a limited role to play under the existing law. ‘This is a private movie. If a political party, like BJP, had also made the movie even then what could the Commission have done? It is not the government or one of its agencies like Doordarshan which is producing the movie or telecasting it. It is a private film which is being screened in private cinema houses, so what can be the objection to it?’
On whether it amounts to surrogate publicity, Quraishi asked ‘what is the restriction on publicity? All the parties are engaging in publicity or not? They are placing advertisements in newspapers and television. So even if it is publicity, what can be done?’
The former CEC said if it is established to be ‘direct publicity’ then the only question which arises is ‘if it should be reported as expenditure by the political party concerned’. But even then, he said, there is no limit on the expenditure of a political party. ‘Suppose a party says that yes it has produced the film and has spent a certain number of crores on it. Even then who can object to it? No one. I see no problem with it.’
If the release of such movies was ethically wrong, he said ‘suppose even if it is a propaganda film, even then who can stop it. Suppose the producer itself is a political party, so what?’
However, Quraishi noted that campaign films prepared by the political parties are subject to scrutiny by the EC and the model code of conduct guidelines.
Another point worthy of note is that Section 126 of the Representation of People’s Act, 1951 provides for a ‘silence period of last 48 hours’ before a constituency goes to vote. But if a movie is used to propagate a political idea or promote a political personality, it can continue to be screened even after campaigning comes to an end.
