'Why Shouldn't It Be Taken Off Air': I&B Ministry Summons Netflix Amid Row Over IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack

Amid the row over IC 814: The Kandahar Hijack, a show directed by Anubhav Sinha, the Information and Broadcasting (I&B) ministry has summoned Netflix representatives to explain why the series should not be taken off air and why the OTT platform should not face action.

The show is based on the 1999 hijacking of an Indian Airlines flight by terrorists and features Naseeruddin Shah, Pankaj Kapur, Vijay Varma, Arvind Swamy and Dia Mirza. The controversy began on social media on Sunday as many pointed out the non-Muslim names of the hijackers in the show and sought a boycott.

However, an earlier Ministry of External Affairs (MEA) note from 2000, which outlined the sequence of events, had conceded that the hijackers had codenamed themselves as Burger, Shankar, Bhola and Doctor. So defenders of the series as well as the writers say that this is not factually wrong and that the names Shankar and Bhola were not invented by the director or the writers.

THE OBJECTIONS

According to sources, the objection is on the following grounds. “The portrayal of events during the hijacking of Indian airlines flight IC 814 from Kathmandu to Kandahar in a recent OTT series is far from the truth. The script and characterisation of actors in the series is an attempt to erase facts and replace them with fiction to normalise a crime against the nation masterminded and facilitated by Pakistan’s ISI,” they said.

“The plotters of the hijacking had intentionally chosen aliases for the hijackers that would sow confusion. This tactical ploy was repeated later when Pakistani terrorists who attacked Mumbai, most notably Kasab, were made to wear mouli on their wrists as part of their attire,” sources said.

Among the issues is that one of the hijackers is shown sympathetic. For example, one of them called ‘Burger’ was seen tell the air hostess to take care of herself. A shot of hijackers and hijacked playing antakshari is also being seen as wrongful projection.

“There was nothing remotely civil or polite about the hijackers. They were hardcore terrorists demanding the release of wanted terrorists who were to later become organisers of targeted killings and massacres. The killer of journalist Daniel Pearl was one of them. The hijackers killed a young passenger and terrorised everybody else, including the crew, leaving them traumatised. Whitewashing these and more facts in the public domain is not creative licence; it is negationism to supplant facts with fiction,” said sources.

LEGITIMISED CRIMINAL INTENT: BJP IT CELL HEAD

Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) IT cell head Amit Malviya in his statement on Sunday said, “Film maker Anubhav Sinha legitimised their criminal intent, by furthering their non-Muslim names. Result? Decades later people will think hindus hijacked IC 814. Left’s agenda to whitewash the crimes of Pakistani terrorirts, all Muslims, served.”

Even actor-MP Kangana Ranaut, whose movie Emergency is caught in a controversy and its release has been deferred, said, “One can even distort real-life events to suit their politically motivated sinister motives…There is freedom for Communists or Leftists across the world for such anti-national expression, but as a nationalist, no OTT platform allows us to make films that revolves around the integrity and unity of Bharat.”

BJP leader Rajeev Chandrasekhar and former minister said: “We all know that the hijackers were from the ISI. The I&B ministry will now look into the matter.”

Sinha is no stranger to controversy. He is considered to be Left-leaning. His earlier movie ‘Bheed’ based on the pandemic faced outrage for depicting facts wrongly. Although Sinha is yet to comment on the criticism and boycott calls, the director expressed his gratitude towards those who loved the series.

The social media is divided with many saying creative licence should be allowed to Anubhav Sinha. While others say that a “maryada” must be followed and nothing that would embolden the Pakistanis should be shown.

DRAFT BROADCAST BILL HAS WAYS TO STREAMLINE CONTENT

The new draft broadcast bill has several provisions to streamline OTT content.

It states:

• OTT service providers would need to provide an ‘intimation’ to the Central Government (likely through the MIB) about their services in India. The obligation here on the OTTs appears to be much lower than that of traditional broadcasters, who require a license to operate.
• Adherence with a ‘Program Code’ and an ‘Advertising Code’, both of which have not been released yet.
• Content classification, which may take the same shape as the one already prevalent under the IT Rules 2021.
• Setting up content evaluation committees consisting of members who are eminent individuals representing different social groups.
• A three-tier regulatory mechanism, which includes self-regulation by the broadcasters, establishing self-regulatory organisations, the appointment of a grievance redressal officer, etc.
• Introduction of newer and detailed statutory penalties covering different violations. The penalties include censure, heavy monetary penalties, imprisonment and/or fines, etc.

The I&B ministry for long has been asking for reining in OTT platforms. Will this latest controversy reignite this demand?