This is a must read expose by the
New Indian Express, the newspaper that has actually descended from
Ram Nath Goenka's Indian Express of Emergency Fame (the Indian
Express of Delhi being a group owned by a European conglomerate,
mainly Italian).
For a
producer, who claimed on TV that she herself
was raped once and that she wanted the
documentary to be a tribute to Indian women,
officials said that strangely she was not
even present during the week-long shoot
inside Tihar.
Do read it when
you have the time to do so as it needs rapt attention.
NEW DELHI: A
rapist in a brown and white check shirt
staring impassively into the camera,
speaking sotto voce that Nirbhaya, the
victim of the December 16, 2012, gangrape,
had asked for it. A 57-year-old British
film producer and actress Leslee Udwin,
who picturised him inside the infamous
Tihar Jail here, is lamenting the fact
that the Indian government has banned her
documentary ‘India’s Daughter’ and muzzled
the freedom of expression. A missing film
producer named Anjali Bhushan. A newborn
film company named Tathagath under whose
banner Leslee produced the documentary
and has left no traces of its existence.
The finacier of ‘India’s Daughter’,
Tribeca Film Institute which is funded by
Ford Foundation, a body under the scanner
of Indian agencies for funding PRS India.
A carefully
constructed web of film companies whose
presence fade in and out as if through the
lens of a camera. Behind the outrage on
the social media and the anger of
columnists and editorial writers over the
ban on the documentary lies a story of
deception, circumvention of rules and a
host of missing links which suggest that
Udwin’s story is not just what it seems to
be--a gift to India.
The storm
broke after February 27, when the BBC
magazine carried an item about the
worldwide release of the film, announcing
the contents, including an exclusive
interview with one of the rapists, Mukesh
Singh. A crew numbering four to five
people shot interviews of the gangrape
convicts inside Tihar Jail in October 2013
after being granted unhindered access for
six to seven days by jail authorities.
Mysteriously, the arrangements were fixed
by an unknown Gurgaon-based photographer,
who “happened to know” some jail officials
from previous assignments.
The Lady
Vanishes
“Dig deep
and you will find a scoop behind the
making of ‘India’s Daughter’,” claims an
intelligence officer involved in the probe
into the making of the documentary. Union
Home Minister Rajnath Singh had on March 4
assured Parliament that the government
will inquire into the matter. He also
clarified that Tihar jail authorities gave
permissions for the shoot to Udwin and
Bhushan. While Udwin, owner of Assassin
Films, last week appeared on all major TV
channels crying foul over the ban and
hogging the international limelight,
Bhushan through whom Udwin got permission
to shoot inside Tihar is missing from the
film’s credits.
The
government rules state that a foreign
filmmaker is not allowed entry inside an
Indian prison. A Ministry of Home Affairs
(MHA) official, probing any violation of
contract in the filming of the
documentary claims Udwin partnered an
Indian co-producer to circumvent the rule
and gain access to the jail premises.
The Home
Minister had stated in Parliament that the
No Objection Certificate (NoC) was given
to Udwin and Bhushan, but the latter’s
name is missing from the documentary shown
on BBC, prompting the MHA officials to
call for all the records pertaining to the
documentary shoot from Tihar Jail
authorities.
Now comes
another twist in the tale. It is learnt
that a UK-based financial organisation
‘Worldview’ funded ‘India’s Daughter’ and
listed Bhushan as the original co-producer
of the documentary. However, after it was
released, her name is missing from not
only the credits, but also from the web
page of the Italian distributor Berta Film
and Denmark-based DR Sale, which hold the
rights to distribute the documentary.
A Web of
Deception
Although,
Bhushan could not be reached despite
numerous attempts, the officials probing
the case pointed out that Udwin has used
her name and expertise to make the
documentary, which had received huge
foreign funding, including money from
Tribeca Film Institute.
Investigators
are also surprised at‘Tathagat Films’
popping up as the co-producer in the
credits of the documentary. They said it
appears to be a fraudulent entity created
at Udwin’s behest. “Tathagat films is not
mentioned in the official papers submitted
by the original makers of the documentary
which means a mirage was created to hide
something on the UK joint venture.
‘Apricot Sky Entertainment’ owned by
Bhushan, which was originally mentioned in
the papers is now missing from the
official credit list. All these
complications raise suspicion over the
working of the British film maker,” the
official said.
Apricot Sky
Entertainment, mentioned as the original
partner by ‘Worldview’ is registered with
the Ministry of Corporate Affairs with
Bhushan as one of the directors. However,
further investigation into ‘Tathagat
films’ added, further, mystery to the
plot. The Ministry of Corporate Affairs
has no records of Tathagat Films, but
there are at least three production houses
that operate under the same name in Mumbai
and Delhi. Arvind Marchande, owner of
Mumbai-based ‘Tathagat Films’ refused any
association with Udwin or Assassin Films
saying he never worked on the documentary.
He also told Express that he has never met
Udwin. The phone numbers of the two
Delhi-based ‘Tathagat Films’ were found to
be incorrect.
Sleight of
Hand
A MHA
official said investigators are also
looking into the affairs of an
entertainment company, which holds musical
events and is perhaps run by a person
known to Udwin and others associated with
the film. Dibang, a senior journalist is
credited as the co-producer in the film. A
questionnaire sent to him seeking his
response on controversy and ongoing probe
remains unanswered.
For a
producer, who claimed on TV that she herself
was raped once and that she wanted the
documentary to be a tribute to Indian women,
officials said that strangely she was not
even present during the week-long shoot
inside Tihar.
“A crew of
four to five people interviewed convicts
inside their cells. Meanwhile, one of the
cameramen quit after a couple of days of
shooting and a new person was drafted into
the crew. Why a new cameraman came into
the scene as shown in the records is yet
to be ascertained,” said an official. He
also said that the interviewed convict,
Mukesh was not comfortable talking to the
TV crew, though, he had given a consent
letter to the film makers, including
Bhushan. When they started, they noticed
that nothing much would be forthcoming
from Mukesh since he was only replying in
monosyllables - ‘yes’ and ‘no’. They crew
decided to resort to the ‘sting strategy’.
It is learnt
that a cameraperson was asked to roll the
camera but pretended that it was switched
off. The rapist was inveigled into an
informal chat. Unaware that he was being
shot, his ugly, unrepentant mindset came
to the fore and Udwin could get the
sensational quotes, which were used in the
film. “He was not speaking, so it was
decided to do a sting and use the entire
set up to look like a proper interview. It
was a long informal interview in which he
had mentioned so many things. The crew
also interviewed a few other convicts, but
till that time Tihar authorities did not
know the contents of Mukesh’s bytes. They
saw it last year and raised objections,”
said an official privy to the developments
in the ongoing probe. The official also
pointed out that the clothes Mukesh wore
during the interview indicated that rules
were violated. “If he had been convicted,
he would have been wearing prison
clothes,” points out a Tihar Jail
official.
The MHA had
given its NOC to the documentary makers on
July 24, 2013. But the consent letter
signed by Mukesh is dated October 7, 2013.
The shoot duration is still under probe to
ascertain whether the four rape accused,
who were convicted by the court on
September 10, 2013, were facing trial or
had been sentenced.
“In both
situations, Tihar authorities were
responsible for violation of rules,” the
official said.
Mystery
Deepens
There is
also element of secrecy as the film
maker’s application is generic in nature.
It just seeks interviews of convicts for
study and research purposes, while the
consent letter (written in English for a
convict who doesn’t understand any
language other than Hindi) mentions that
the consent was for “a documentary
cantered on the December 16 Delhi
gangrape case”.
Udwin has
left India fearing arrest after Delhi
Police registered an FIR. She has claimed
that she spent two years working on the
documentary. The ongoing inquiry
contradicts her claim.
“We are
examining her travel details to check
whether she had obtained a Film maker’s
visa or came to India on a tourist visa.
Our initial findings suggest that shooting
in India was a limited affair and she did
not spend two years in India as she had
claimed to international TV channels. The
entry, stay and exit of foreigners into
and from India are governed by the
Passport (Entry into India) Act, 1920, and
the Registration of Foreigners Rules,
1992. Documentary filmmakers are issued
journalist visas valid for up to six
months.
The
undertaking to the MEA clearly states that
the film maker will have to show the film
to a representative of the government, If
so required, at least two weeks before
final telecast and will work
constructively with the government
representatives to remove deviations, If
any, from the approved scripts of the
film. Investigators have asked the MEA and
the Bureau of Immigration under the MHA to
share the details filed by Udwin while
applying for her visa.
Tricking the
System
“In most of
the cases, foreign filmmakers circumvent
the rules by getting a co-producer on the
board. They generally come on tourist
visas and subsequently hire a production
house to do the job. We have asked our
London Mission to probe whether Udwin had
submitted a synopsis of the documentary
while applying for the visa,” a source
said adding that so far they have not
received any response.
Udwin in her
earlier television interviews had denied
violating any rules. She had even told
some channels that she possessed all the
required clearances and perhaps the Home
Minister was misinformed.
After the
ban of film, Udwin appeared on several
International TV channels saying the film
was her ‘gift to India’ and she only tried
to expose the mindset of rapists and
wanted to highlight the country’s zeal to
fight crimes against women.
But, an
official involved in the probe who is
aware of the funding pattern of ‘India’s
Daughter’ and knows the filmmaker said
Udwin had successfully sold the film to
distributors branding “Delhi as rape
capital of the world” and “India as
society where brutality against women is
widespread” as has appeared on their
websites.
He also said
besides grants received before filming the
project, Udwin also successfully marketed
the film with the help of distributors.
Besides BBC, the film is also slated for
release on Passionate Eye, a Canadian
documentary TV series, which airs on CBC
News Network of Canada.
“Udwin was
obliged to come to India for the
documentary’s publicity campaign because
the agreement with Tribeca. Another one is
due in New York,” an MHA official said.
Who is
Leslee Udwin?
■ Little
known in India before the India’s Daughter
controversy, 58-year-old Leslee Udwin
produced two feature films East is East
and its sequel West is West. According to
her LinkedIn profile, Leslee was awarded
the London Critics Producer of the Year
Award and also won “BAFTA” (British
Academy Award) for best British film. She
specialises in producing feature films and
lecturing on film and film production.
According to UK Companies Directory,
Leslee floated Assassin Films Limited in
1992.
■ The Home
Ministry had alleged that Leslee did not
clearly indicate the reason behind the
Tihar interview and kept the authorities
in the dark. However, Leslee refuted the
charges claiming she followed the rules.
■ Currently,
Leslee holds three appointments at three
active companies—West is West Distribution
Ltd, Assassin Films (the One & Only )
Limited and Assassin Films. Earlier she
held directorship in five companies that
are no longer active.
HOW FOREIGN
FILMMAKERS CIRCUMVENT LAW
Months
before Home Ministry ordered a probe
against Leslee Udwin for violating rules,
a look-out circular was issued against two
French filmmakers for shooting Jarwa tribe
for a documentary film in October 2014
without permission. Andman Police had
filed FIR against French director
Alexandre Dereims and producer Claire
Beilvert after they came know through a
feature on Facebook, promoting a
documentary “Organic Jarawa”.
Courtesy:Gopalan V
