Filmmaker and former Central Board of Film Certification (CBFC) advisory panel member EV Ganesh Babu has shed light on the certification process behind Vijay's Jana Nayagan, explaining why the film's censor clearance became a prolonged issue and why he believes much of the speculation surrounding the delay was misplaced.
Speaking in an exclusive interview with CE, Ganesh Babu revealed that he was part of one of the committees that viewed Jana Nayagan during its certification process. However, he clarified that he was not a member of the final committee that granted the film its certificate, preventing him from commenting on whether the final 'A' certification was appropriate.
According to him, the film was first viewed by a five-member examining committee in Chennai. That committee reportedly recommended that the film be referred to a Revising Committee, a larger panel constituted for sensitive or disputed cases. Instead of applying for a revising committee immediately, however, the producers chose to approach the court with a complaint against the CBFC.
Ganesh Babu explained that once the matter reached court, the certification process naturally slowed down. Since CBFC officials from Mumbai also had to respond, hearings could not happen instantly. He said the producers even approached the Supreme Court at one stage before eventually withdrawing the case filed against the CBFC. By the time they reapplied for certification, however, the Election Commission had already announced elections, introducing an entirely new complication.
Ganesh Babu said that because Jana Nayagan contained political themes, election-related rules came into play after the Model Code of Conduct was announced. He stressed that no CBFC official intended to delay the film deliberately, but officers also could not ignore election regulations while certifying a politically themed film.
He argued that if the producers had withdrawn their court case earlier and applied for a revising committee sooner, there would have been enough time to complete the certification process before the election announcement. Instead, everything happened at the last minute, making scheduling nearly impossible.
Ganesh Babu also explained why constituting a revising committee itself takes time. Unlike a regular examining committee, a revising committee consists of around ten members headed by a senior chairperson, often someone of national stature or a retired senior bureaucrat. The members are selected carefully to ensure neutrality and fairness.
Because of the number of members involved, even one person's unavailability or illness can delay the committee's formation. He said replacements cannot simply be made instantly for sensitive films, as the panel has to be constituted according to strict norms.
Addressing rumours about leaks during certification, Ganesh Babu described the highly secure screening process followed by the CBFC.
He said films are supplied through Qube using encrypted hard drives protected by KDM licences, making it impossible for members to copy or screen the film elsewhere. Producers and directors usually wait in an adjoining room while the committee watches the film, and the security surrounding the screening is stringent enough to prevent leaks.
Ganesh Babu said it became evident from the beginning of the screening that Jana Nayagan was a politically themed film. During discussions after the screening, the committee reportedly felt that, because elections had been announced, a No Objection Certificate from the Election Commission would be required before certification could proceed.
He recalled that the producers suggested they were willing to postpone the film's release until after the elections if necessary and requested that the CBFC issue the certificate immediately. However, he said the committee informed them that there was no legal provision allowing certification solely on the basis of such a letter. Instead, they were advised to obtain the necessary clearance if they intended to release the film during the election period.
Following these developments, the film was eventually screened again before another committee in Mumbai. Ganesh Babu said he had initially been scheduled to be part of another viewing but was unable to attend because he was in Delhi on National Awards-related work. As a result, he was not part of the panel that ultimately decided the film's certification.
When asked whether the eventual certification was correct, Ganesh Babu declined to answer, citing CBFC protocol. He said that even after leaving the screening room, members are not permitted to publicly express opinions on whether a film deserved a particular certificate or even comment on the film itself while serving in that capacity.
Ganesh Babu clarified that he was not saying the producers were wrong to approach the courts, noting that every citizen has the right to seek legal remedy. However, he pointed out that court proceedings inevitably consume time because judges need to study each case in detail before passing orders.
In his view, had the producers opted for the Revising Committee instead of litigation, there was a "100% possibility" that Jana Nayagan could have been certified in time for the Pongal release window.