Click to play videoThe most prestigious and prominent film awards in India, the 53rd National Films Awards, seem to have run into controversy yet again.
A jury of the award alleged that the award process was biased and incompetent.
The 53rd National film Awards for the films made in 2005 were to be announced on the May 12.
The Delhi High Court put a stay on five awards on Wednesday on the declaration of the awards directing the government to look into the allegations by one of the juries of the award committee.
Justice Kailash Gambhir directed the Information and Broadcasting Ministry not to declare the awards without getting clearance from the court.
'It is serious as the dissent comes by a jury member,'” Justice Gambhir said in a court order.
The awards are not new to controversy, as the awards have often been criticised as biased and unfair. Many have said that the awards have become Bollywood-centric when they were actually meant to honour non-mainstream Indian cinema.
So that brings up a question: Are the National Film Awards all about favouritism?
On the CNN-IBN show India 360 actor-producer, Arun Nalawade, film critic Meenakshi Shedde and National Award jury member Shyamali Banerjee came together with host Sagarika Ghose to debate on the issue.
Jury members not competent enough?
So what actually prompted Shyami Banerjee to file a case against the National Film Award jury? Was the jury being biased and incompetent the only reason for her to file a petition?
Banarjee started by sending a “decent” letter to the Information and Broadcasting Ministry on the day of deliberation. However, she did not get any letter from their end. It was only later that she came to know that the awards were being announced formally. Banerjee felt no option but to go the High Court ultimately.
‘I felt absolutely dissatisfied with the selection procedure, deliberation procedure and by the selection of some film for different categories of awards.”
So what actually takes place in the deliberation process?
Banerjee felt that that most of the jury members were not competent enough to justify themselves to speak about a film, about why they are choosing a film and why are they negating a film. And even during the time of deliberation, the jury prefers to go by the whim of the majority, which was undemocratic.
So are the jury members actually chosen by the Ministry of Broadcasting or are competent film people who are the members?
“There are mostly two or three people who are from the film industry and a number of them are recommended by the Ministry of officials,” said Banerjee.
Every one pushes different agendas
So many controversies have arisen regarding the awards. It has been criticised. Is this a moment for the jury to be overhauled and taken away from the Information and Broadcasting Ministry?
Shedde opined that there are certainly flaws in the system but there is an involvement of human beings in the decision-making process so subjective things are inevitable.
Does political consideration also some into play when the jury decides the award?
“There will always be all kinds of considerations including political, monetary, scandals too for that matter. Unless it is proven, it is very hard to prosecute someone,” Shedde said.
Shedde also thought that Banerjee had a genuine reason to be upset enough to file a case against the jury in the High Court whether there is proof or not.
She remembered the time when she was a jury member and she discovered that that there were films which were not even in the reckoning yet they were being promoted. Some voted for it. Everyone pushed different agendas.
So with everyone pushing different agendas, how could Banerjee not have an agenda?
“It was only for the sake of transparency and proper judgement that I filed the case. I had voiced my protest but I didn’t get a platform. I had to do it on board to negate my ground,” said Banerjee.
So after winning the National Award for the film Shwas did Nalawade also feel that he was targeted by a number of people saying that he may have pulled some strings to win the award?
“I never experienced any thing like that after winning the award. I think that controversy is a part of every film and it is present everywhere. We should respect the jury’s decision on the results,” said Nalawade.
Banerjee had a disagreement with Black, Parineeta and Parzania., why didn’t she voice them in the jury and abided by the majority verdict rather than talking it to the court?
“I tried to raise my voice against the selection of these films but my objection went unheard. The jury was mobilised. The total deliberation is not conducted by the Chairperson but the DFF official,” said Banerjee.
Should the jury be an autonomous body?
So if the officials are mobilising the jury. How does the jury operate in other countries like that of the BAFTA Award or the Academy Award?
Shedde said that the jury of many awards is autonomous bodies. The jury members of the Academy Award have a role in the constituting the award but the industry has a better role.
So should an award giving body be an autonomous body from the film industry itself and not from the government?
“I think that it is important to have people from different backgrounds and not just film people. However, it is important to stick to set of the rules that the awards have,” said Shedde.
So for one who had won the award, did Nalawade did he think that the awards had become Bollywood-centric with so many belonging to Bollywood getting the award?
“It is not thing like that. However, the controversy that took place regarding the awards is something that could have been sorted out within the jury. I am surprised that it went to the court,” said Nalawade.
(For updates you can share with your friends, follow IBNLive on Facebook, Twitter and Google+)
displayed with permission. Use of the CNN name and/or logo on or as part of CNN-IBN does not derogate from the intellectual property rights of Cable News Network in respect of them.