The intention behind the revolutionary change that happened in the recent political arena in the country where citizens demanded their right to free thinking, freedom to talk, to walk on the streets freely and all in all to live freely" , he said.

Sri Lanka is one of the very few democratic countries which still censors films and other artistic performances.

The free thinking world is vehemently opposed to any kind of censoring - be it for films, literature, painting, theatre, television or music.

Isn't it time that we put an end to this unethical and uncivilized practice and maintained the dignity of artistic expression?

Even though this is a serious debate and it is constantly being questioned by serious thinking filmmakers, critics and citizens who value the right of freedom, it has still not received a positive response. .

In this context the Sunday Observer interviewed the newly appointed chairman of the PPB who is an eminent media personality and famous for his liberal ideology.

Excerpts of the interview:

Q: Being a democratic country, is it necessary to have a Censor Board?

A: Considering the present socio-political trends in the world, it is not so important in having a Censor Board at all in any country.

However, many countries around the world do gradually abolish this concept of a censor board which is an outdated institution serving only a negative role. Even in India, where the cinema industry is so huge they were also have serious thought of abolishing the censor board.

A few years ago since all the films were made on cine cameras, the censor board could cut and edit the scenes on celluloid.

But today the industry is digitalized and if the censor board edits a scene, the next day that particular scene can go viral on the Internet.

Prime Minister Ranil Wickramasignhe is keen on abolishing this archaic concept and wants a grading board instead which is a broader concept and goes in hand with the current trends in the world.

We hope to amend the current Act as soon as possible and do the necessary changes accordingly.

Q: Since 1989, although the PPB (also known as the Censor Board) is under the Cultural Ministry. During the previous regime most decisions were taken according to the of the Defence Ministry requirements, where any person could be misled to think that the PPB is still within the ambit of the Defence Ministry. How did this happen and can you assure that those unethical practices will not be repeated?

A: Even though the PPB was originally set up under the Defence Ministry in 1952, the Act was amended in 1989 and re-established under the Cultural Ministry. However during the previous regime, as a result of militarizing all spheres of Sri Lankans, the PPB could not stand against those decisions.

There were instances where military officials were appointed as the members of the PPB especially during the war and after.

Some decisions taken by these military officers, adversely affected the freedom of artistes and the freedom of expression.

Now, we assure that we will not introduce military personnel as members of the PPB. The present PPB comprises eminent people.

Q: Who are the members of new PPB?

A: According to the existing Act, we can appoint fifteen members to the board. As the chairman of the board I am pleased with the present board as I think it is a colourful combination with a collective of free thinkers.

The Board comprises award winning journalists, famous authors, for the first time a web journalist and a young social media activist. Out of fifteen members, six are women and this time around we increased the numbers from the minority to five..

Most importantly none of them were on the Board for the past decade.

Q: Is there any mechanism through which members are appointed?

A: There's no such mechanism but according the existing Act, the secretary of the Cultural Ministry has the right and powers to appoint the members. However, there was political influence earlier for these appointments but I ensure that this time we didn't go on that premise.

They were appointed by an independent committee appointed by the Prime Minister and none of them are political appointees. Other than my appointment as which was made by Prime Minister, Ranil Wickramasighe, all other appointments were according to independent policies of selection committee.

Q:Films like 'Flying Fish' by Sanjeewa Pushpakumara which was acclaimed by the international film festival sector experienced untold misery once it was screened in Sri Lanka at an international film festival organized by the French Embassy. This was despite the fact that the organizers followed the correct procedure.

The film crew was taken to the notorius Fourth Floor and grilled.What s more the director was threatened by a military official not to return to his homeland.

Can the Government set rules or a framework to limit the freedom of thinking of artisteswhich is guaranteed under the Article 10 of the Constitution?

A: Other than the Public Performance Act, no one can interrupt or limit an artistes freedom of expression. That is the policy that we adhere to and will re-establish in the industry.

There can be rules and regulations for a country where all the citizens have to adhere to.

According to it artistes should be given the right to express their artistic performances and share it with the audience.

Even as far back as 1952 when the present Act came into being the Act contained the basic principles of human rights, freedom of thought which support ethnic and religious harmony in the state.

However, considering the contents of most of the films which received state patronage during the past few years, it is questionable as to whether they considered religious and ethnic harmony in the country but they only considered the state security.

However, we stopped political interference and work as an independent body and will dedicate ourselves for the betterment of the Arts and artistes of the country. We may not censor artistic expression but that doesn't mean we will permit pornography. That will definitely be banned. We value artistes and true artistic efforts.

Q: How do you draw the line between good and bad artistic endeavours?

A: I don't think it's a challenge. Because if other parts of the world can identify what is pornography and what is not, why can't we?

If our parameters do not merely depend on false morals and if we have commitment to do something better for any artistic industry, I don't think it's a challenge.

Q: The recent 'Charlie Hebdo' incident in Paris, is where freedom of expression is debatable and is an example of irresponsible media practices. What's your opinion?

A: Though I read some news about it I'm not aware about that particular incident. However, as I mentioned earlier we shouldn't leave room for racism. Racism is more dangerous than sexuality.We have experienced 30 years of war due to racism, the damage was immense. Although we Sri Lankans are in the news for the fourth consecutive year as the number one country for the Google sex search,

I don't think that damage can be compared with the damage caused due to ethnic and religious conflict.

Q: Character stereo typing is one major discrimination that we witnessed for decades, especially in cinema. How can we handle this kind of content in cinema in the future?

A: The Board itself cannot handle this kind of social prejudice. Rather we have to have a serious social debate about these issues.

- By Anuradha Kodagoda

(Sunday Observer)