IDSFFK 2026: Centre Denies Censor Exemption to 31 Films Ahead of Kerala Documentary Festival

The 18th International Documentary and Short Film Festival of Kerala (IDSFFK) is facing a major screening-related setback after the Union Ministry of Information and Broadcasting denied censor exemption to 31 films scheduled for the festival. The festival is scheduled to take place in Thiruvananthapuram from September 25 to 30, 2026.

The affected titles include films from the festival's official selection, its International Non-Fiction section, Festival Winners section and Nepal Package. The development has also prompted a call from Kerala's Minister for Cinema, P. C. Vishnunath, for the decision to be reconsidered.

Importantly, the issue concerns censor exemption for festival screening, rather than a CBFC refusal to certify the films for theatrical release. The distinction matters because films being shown at festivals can require an exemption from the certification requirement.

What Happened at IDSFFK?

According to reports published on September 19, the Kerala State Chalachitra Academy had submitted a list of 347 films to the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting seeking exemption from certification requirements for the festival.

The initial submission contained summaries of the films' subjects. The ministry subsequently sought more detailed information on 40 films, including detailed synopses and screeners, which the Academy provided for review. Of those films examined in this process, 31 were subsequently denied permission for screening, according to multiple reports.

The 31 films reportedly comprise:

• 18 officially selected films

• 9 films in the International Non-Fiction section

• 3 films in the Festival Winners section

• 1 film from the Nepal Package

A Malayalam film is also among the affected titles.

The official IDSFFK website identifies the festival as an annual event organised under the Kerala State Chalachitra Academy and currently lists its 2026 programme.

Which Films Have Been Denied Permission?

Among the films identified in reports are Parliament Street, Sanitised Republic: Cast(e) & Contracts, Globe, Memories of a Window, Birds of War, Put Your Soul on Your Hand and Walk and Our Land.

The subjects of several of these documentaries illustrate the range of material programmed at IDSFFK.

Sanitised Republic: Cast(e) & Contracts, for example, examines the lives of sanitation workers associated with Delhi hospitals and the issues surrounding contractual employment and caste-linked sanitation work. The IDSFFK's own website lists the film in its documentary programme.

Parliament Street, meanwhile, deals with public memory, personal memories and the history associated with a prominent Delhi street. The film is also listed on the official IDSFFK programme.

Another affected title, Put Your Soul on Your Hand and Walk, directed by Iranian filmmaker Sepideh Farsi, documents a series of video conversations with Palestinian photojournalist Fatma Hassona in Gaza. The film has subsequently been screened at international venues outside India, including the UK's Institute of Contemporary Arts.

Why the Censor Exemption Process Matters

The terminology surrounding the controversy is important.

The Ministry of Information and Broadcasting maintains a formal policy framework concerning exemptions from film certification. Its current website lists a March 30, 2026 policy document titled “Exemptions from the provisions of certification of films.” 

Separately, the Ministry has stated that the Central Board of Film Certification is the statutory body responsible for certifying films for public exhibition under the Cinematograph Act and associated rules.

Therefore, describing the 31 films simply as having been “banned” would go beyond what has been independently established in the material reviewed for this report. The verified development is that the Ministry has denied the requested exemption allowing these films to be screened at IDSFFK.

The precise reasons for each individual denial have not been publicly established in the sources reviewed for this article. That distinction should be retained in coverage until the relevant official orders or explanations are made available.

Kerala Minister Calls for Reconsideration

Following the decision, Kerala Minister for Cinema P. C. Vishnunath called for the Union Ministry to reconsider the denial.

According to The South First, Vishnunath argued that films at an international festival are selected through an expert curatorial process and said the denial restricts the curatorial freedom of such festivals. He also emphasised the role of documentaries and short films in presenting different social realities and perspectives.

Those comments represent the Kerala government's stated position on the matter and should be distinguished from the Ministry's decision itself. As of the latest reporting reviewed here, a detailed public explanation from the Union Ministry addressing the individual 31 films was not available in the sources examined.

This Is Not the First Recent Kerala Festival Dispute

The IDSFFK development comes months after a similar dispute surrounding the 30th International Film Festival of Kerala (IFFK) in December 2025.

The official IFFK website recorded that the Union Ministry had initially refused censor exemption to 19 films selected for that festival. The Kerala government subsequently instructed the Kerala State Chalachitra Academy to ensure that the affected films were screened.

Contemporary reporting also documented that some of those 19 films later received exemptions following discussions between the state and Union governments.

That earlier episode provides context for why the latest IDSFFK decision has attracted attention, but it does not establish that the same outcome will occur this year.

What Happens Next?

The immediate question is whether any of the 31 films will receive clearance before the festival begins on September 25.

The Kerala side has publicly called for reconsideration, while the available reports do not yet establish whether the Union Ministry will revise its decision or whether the festival organisers will make changes to the programme.

For now, the confirmed position is that 31 scheduled films do not have the required censor exemption for screening at IDSFFK, while the festival itself remains scheduled for September 25-30 in Thiruvananthapuram.

The Celebrity Hour Take

The significance of the IDSFFK dispute goes beyond the number of films affected. It highlights the regulatory process that international film festivals in India must navigate when presenting works that do not hold conventional certification for public exhibition.

The immediate facts are relatively straightforward: the Academy submitted 347 films for exemption, additional material was requested for 40, and 31 of those films were denied permission according to the reporting available on September 19. The reasons behind the individual denials, however, are not sufficiently documented in the public sources reviewed to draw broader conclusions about the Ministry's criteria.

That distinction is important for readers. The controversy can be reported and examined without assuming motives that have not been established.

The next significant development will therefore be whether the Ministry provides further clarification, changes its decision on any of the films, or whether the festival proceeds with a revised programme.

Sources & Verification

This report was prepared using the official IDSFFK website and the Ministry of Information and Broadcasting's published policy material, alongside current reporting from The South First, Kerala Kaumudi and other Indian news outlets. Film-specific details were cross-checked against the IDSFFK programme and, where available, international film-programme sources.

The article deliberately uses “denied censor exemption” or “denied screening permission” rather than treating the films as permanently “banned”, because the available evidence establishes the denial of festival-screening exemption but does not establish a permanent prohibition or the individual reasons for every denial.