I&B Ministry
Benegal Committee on film certification invites public views within guidelines’ ambit
NEW DELHI: The Shyan Benegal Committee examining the certification process followed by the Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) set up early this month has sought the views and suggestions of the public in this regard.
While noting that the views should be restricted to two pages covering all important aspects, the notice on the Information and Broadcasting Ministry website says the comments must be “within the ambit of the existing Act, Rules and guidelines, which have withstood the scrutiny of various Courts.”
The comments may be forwarded to NFDC to rajani@nfdcindia.com.
The notice also gives the terms of reference of the Committee and says the guidelines are expected to provide aholistic interpretation of the provisions of the Cinematograph Act and the Rules.The present guidelines have also been reproduced in the notice.
The other Members of the Committee include filmmaker Rakeysh Omprakash Mehra, creative director Piyush Pandey, media veteran Bhawana Somayya, NFDC MD Nina Lath Gupta and Joint Secretary (Films) Sanjay Murthy as Member Convenor. The Committee has been requested to submit its recommendations within two months.
Interestingly, although media reports had indicated that Gautam Ghose and Kamal Haasan had been included as members at the request of Benegal, the notice on the Ministry website makes no mention of this.
When setting up the Committee in later in a meeting with I&B Minister Arun Jaitley, Minister of State Rajyavardhan Rathore and Secretary Sunil Arora, it had been stated that the aim was to suggest a paradigm that ensures that artistic creativity and freedom do not get stifled/curtailed even as films are certified.
Noting that “in most countries of the world there is a mechanism/process of certifying feature films and documentaries,” an official release had also said that the attempt should also be that “the people tasked with the work of certification understand these nuances.”
The recommendations of this Committee are expected to provide a holistic framework and enable those tasked with the work of certification of films to discharge their responsibilities keeping in view this framework.
During their deliberations, the Committee would be expected to take note of the best practices in various parts of the world, especially where the film industry is given sufficient and adequate space for creative and aesthetic expression.
The Committee would recommend broad guidelines / procedures under the provisions of the Cinematograph Act 1952 / Rules for the benefit of the chairperson and other members of the Screening Committee. The staffing pattern of Central Board of Film Certification would also be looked into in an effort to recommend a framework which would provide efficient / transparent user friendly services.
This is not the first time that such a committee has been set up. After earlier attempts, the last Committee that examined similar issues was headed by the eminent Mukul Mudgal. However, no action has been taken on that report submitted in 2013.
I&B Ministry
IT Rules tweaks are clarificatory, not expansion of powers: MeitY
Govt signals flexibility as platforms push for clarity on user content rules
NEW DELHI: The Centre has sought to dial down concerns over its proposed amendments to the IT Rules, with Ministry of Electronics and Information Technology secretary S Krishnan asserting that the changes are intended as clarifications rather than an expansion of regulatory powers.
Pushing back against criticism from platforms and civil society, S Krishnan said the amendments “do not in any way actually give us wider powers” and are meant to remove ambiguity in how existing provisions are applied. He added that the trigger came largely from within the ecosystem, with intermediaries themselves seeking clearer guidance on compliance, takedowns and record preservation.
At the heart of the debate is the growing friction between platforms and policymakers over responsibility for user-generated content. Intermediaries have argued that they should not be treated on par with publishers, particularly when content is created and uploaded by users. Krishnan acknowledged this concern, noting that “a sharper distinction” between user content and publisher content is needed and is currently under examination.
The issue becomes more complex in enforcement scenarios. While registered publishers can be directly asked to modify or remove content, intermediaries often lack control over the original creator. “In such cases, the intermediary cannot direct those changes,” Krishnan explained, underlining the need for procedural nuance.
Another key proposal under discussion is to bring user-generated news and current affairs content within a more unified regulatory ambit, potentially under the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting. The move follows suggestions that a single authority should handle such content, regardless of whether it originates from a publisher or an individual user.
Even as the government frames the amendments as a tidy-up exercise, fault lines remain. Industry players have flagged concerns over compliance burdens, especially for smaller businesses, and questioned whether advisories could effectively become binding without explicit legislative backing. Krishnan said the government is mindful of these risks and is exploring ways to ease obligations, including possible relaxations under certain provisions.
The ministry is also considering consolidating multiple advisories and guidelines into a more structured framework, a step widely seen as addressing long-standing confusion over what platforms are expected to follow.
On takedowns, the government has reiterated that due process will remain unchanged. Krishnan stressed that actions will continue to be governed by established procedures, with reasons recorded and review mechanisms in place. He also pointed to the surge in deepfakes and synthetic media as a factor behind rising content disputes, calling it a “scale challenge” for regulators.
Interestingly, Krishnan also framed social media platforms as commercial entities rather than pure vehicles of free expression, hinting at a broader shift in regulatory thinking as platform economics come into sharper focus.
With stakeholders seeking more time and, in some cases, a rollback of the proposals, the government has kept the consultation process open-ended. Krishnan said further revisions remain on the table, signalling a willingness to adapt the draft based on feedback.
For now, the message from MeitY is clear: the rules may not be tightening in intent, but the effort to define them more clearly is well underway.
