First Pahlaj Nihalani, then Mukesh Khanna and now Gajendra Chauhan, the recent appointments to the State-run cinema bodies have created a furore. Till now we were hearing voices of resentment in the sections of the media but with the students of Film and Television Institute of India going on a protest strike, the issue of saffronisation of Central Board of Film Certification, Children Film Society of India and FTII has assumed greater significance.

Seasoned documentary filmmaker Anand Patwardhan, who is supporting the students, sees a pattern in the recent appointments. “There is a clear pattern to recent saffronised appointments to high positions of public office. We need and demand transparency in the appointment procedure in Government-run institutions. What is happening at FTII is a good sign. May the resistance grow, everywhere. Why should Government institutional heads have only the colour and odour of the party in power? What happens then to the idea of excellence?” Patwardhan wonders.

Talking of the pattern, Patwardhan says first Pahlaj Nihalani was made head of the CBFC. “His qualification is that he made C-grade movies in Bollywood, including films with sexism and plenty of violence. His real qualification is that he made campaign videos for Narendra Modi’s election campaign. His actions after becoming head (consist of) banning 20 words from cinema, including the word ‘Bombay’. Incidentally, he liberally used many of these words in his own earlier films.”

Next, he says, Mukesh Khanna was made head of CFSI. “His qualification is that he played Bhishma in ‘Mahabharata’ as well as ‘Shaktiman’. He was an avowed bhakt of Asaram bapu, selling rudraksha on tele-shopping. His true qualification is he campaigned for Modi, comparing him to Shaktimaan.” Similarly, he continues, Gajendra Chauhan’s appointment as chairperson for FTII reeks of an agenda. “His qualification is Yudhisthir in ‘Mahabharat’, playing a lecher in ‘Khuli Khidki’, a soft porn, dancing frenetically with Asaram bapu, selling nava grahas (gems for the superstitious) on tele-shopping. His real qualification is that he is a long term BJP member.”

Patwardhan goes on to add that the larger issue is about the credentials of these people in the field of cinema. “The persons appointed have extremely poor qualifications in the real world and are weak and amenable. Jahnu Barua was a front runner and very popular in the filmmaking community as well as with students. In what way is Chauhan a better choice?” he asks.

Barua, who is in Assam, says he didn’t get any letter from the Ministry about him being in the fray for the post of chairperson. “I got intimation about getting nominated as a member to the council. I am ready to serve the institution in whatever way I can. But the fact that the students are protesting concerns me. Everybody has a democratic right to protest and I hope their concerns will be addressed.”

Denying that he was after the post, veteran director and an alumnus of FTII Subhash Ghai says FTII is his mother institute and he wants every thing best for it. “I cannot comment on the government choice of chairman but am surely concerned with the welfare of the students of FTII and right kind of cinema education in India since Government spends 37 crores on two institutes: FTII and SRFTI (Satyajit Ray Film and Television Institute).”

Filmmaker and member of CBFC, Dr. Chandraprakash Dwivedi, who identifies with the BJP’s ideology, says when it comes to choose between the country and the party he will always choose the former. “I have raised my concerns against the list of cuss words that were banned by the Chairman, CBFC by citing certain guidelines. The Cinematograph Act was promulgated in 1952 and since then our society and cinema has seen tremendous change. I have a young daughter who is aware of the developments and I don’t want to become a laughing stock in the eyes of the young generation. I wanted to raise the issue at the Board meeting in Delhi but it was suddenly postponed without giving a new date.”

As for the appointments, Dwivedi says, “People are finding it odd because after a long time a Government of different ideology has come to power. Last time when Anupam Kher was removed I was asked to comment and I said it was natural because such appointments are always political in nature. As for the credibility factor, my sense is the Ministry must have offered these posts to more seasoned personalities and when they showed their inability that they have made these choices. It seems they want people who can devote time and energy.”