The recently released documentary film, ‘Silence in the Courts’ by award winning film maker Prasanna Vithanage created a stir due to its criticism of the judicial system. The movie was launched on October 4, and on the following day, responding to a plaint by the former judicial officer named in the film, the Colombo District Court issued an injunction suspending the screening of the film until October 19, when the judge, considering the arguments made by the lawyers, decided to remove the ban on the movie.
Director
Prasanna Vithanage |
The Sunday Observer met with the movie director to discuss his first documentary production. However, with the court case pending, though the ban was lifted, the topics of discussion were limited.
This is your first documentary film, isn’t it? How did you end up directing a documentary?
Yes, it’s my first documentary, so, I’m new to the field of documentaries and was hesitant to take up the project. But, I was approached by The ‘Justice Project’, which had a group of South Asian film directors to make documentaries, and, I represented Sri Lanka. The re-enacting of the story is more powerful in the documentary format.
Is it very different from making a feature movie?
More difficult. We didn’t have a script. We shot a lot of material, worth 9-10 hours. The documentary was born in the editing stage when we decided what to include and what not, and where each piece would fit in, in a one hour documentary. It was like a man walking on many paths to figure out which one is the right one.
The theme of the project was ‘Social Justice,’ and under that umbrella theme, I focused on the Judiciary, has it declined, or not.
I followed the story when the Ravaya published it from 1997-99. Victor Ivan’s book told the story comprehensively but there was still something unfinished about it, with no culmination, as the title of the book, ‘An Unfinished Struggle’ suggested.
I wanted to explore it. In fact, going by the theories, as the director, I analyzed the facts laid before me, and came to a conclusion in the story, playing the role of a judge, ironically.
Did you do any independent research for the documentary?
Of course, I carried out an independent research. I visited the village. The village and the people’s lifestyles told a very different story, far beyond the story in question, and I wanted to get to the core of it. I interviewed Victor Ivan, the person who disclosed the story, and then travelled to the village of Pothupitiya, using the normal route the villagers travel and interviewed many people who had no direct connection with the story, except for the fact that they lived in the same village as the victim.
That way I was able to get an idea about the root of the characters. In addition, I got hold of all the documents related to the case, legal and others.
For the reader, familiar with the story since the late 1990s, what new aspects can they expect in your documentary?
It’s a story without a closure, so, one of my objectives was to look at anything else I can see beyond what Victor Ivan published.
I wanted to focus on the backgrounds of individual players in the story, and how the powerful people become more powerful when they have access to state apparatus.
What kind of response did you get from the parties involved?
One of the protagonists was reluctant to speak to the camera. She said, justice was never delivered to her, and now her children are grown up, so, she didn’t want to revisit her past. The other woman was willing to speak but I didn’t want to relate the story from her point of view. It could be very painful for her.
If you are wondering whether these women have moved on, they haven’t. So, I used the evidence given before the Three Member Preliminary Fact Finding Investigation to show that at the end of the story, justice was not served.