Long before the release of the Hema Committee report in August 2024, which exposed the deep fractures beneath Malayalam cinema’s progressive façade, filmmakers Indu Lakshmi and Mini IG had sought to expose the particularly hypocritical brand of inclusivity that shaped Kerala’s film industry. Both of them were grantees of the state government’s flagship initiative, ‘Films Directed by Women’, which pledges Rs 3 crore annually to fund two films by women filmmakers. When the project was announced in 2019, it was deservedly received with much fanfare, but Indu and Mini have a different reality to share.
“We were awarded funding for our films based on the merit of our scripts. Yet, at the Kerala State Film Development Corporation (KSFDC), which oversees the funding, we were constantly belittled, as if this opportunity wasn’t something we had earned, but rather something they had granted us out of sheer generosity,” Indu said. The KSFDC, the country’s first public-sector corporation for film development, was established by the state government in 1975 with the aim of fostering the Malayalam film industry and facilitating the production and promotion of films.
Indu and Mini have both accused veteran filmmaker and KSFDC chairman Shaji N Karun of verbal abuse and targeted harassment. They have alleged that KSFDC authorities including Shaji deliberately delayed their projects, constantly questioned their capabilities, and in some cases, insulted and humiliated them. Indu in particular has shared harrowing accounts of the vindictive behaviour she allegedly faced from the KSFDC chairman, including threats to ensure that her future films would never see the light of day.
The two women filmmakers are not the only people to raise such allegations against the award-winning director and the KSFDC. Others have been slapped with defamation cases for publicly pointing out their concerns about the organisation. There is also a case against Shaji at the Kerala State Human Rights Commission, filed by a KSFDC employee, accusing him of targeted harassment at the workplace.
The allegations raised by Indu and Mini, many of which are supported by witnesses and former employees interviewed by TNM, paint a picture of an entrenched, misogynistic culture at the KSFDC that actively stifles women’s creative autonomy.
Yet, instead of addressing the issues raised by these filmmakers, the state government has continued to shield and favour Shaji. In December 2024, Shaji was bestowed the prestigious JC Daniel Award — the state’s highest film honour. Feminist activists and filmmakers have pointed out the irony of such a move, especially in light of the Hema Committee’s revelations and the growing call to hold those in power accountable.
Shaji also remains a key figure in shaping the state’s film policy, acting as the chairperson of the drafting committee. Sthreepaksha Koottayma, a collective of feminist activists, recently appealed to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan in an open letter, urging him to reconsider Shaji’s position as a chairperson of the committee. Acknowledging Shaji’s stature as a senior filmmaker with numerous awards to his name, the letter argued that these accolades, however, did not excuse his misogynistic attitudes. “Awards should not serve as a shield for violations of human rights,” it said. The letter was signed by several prominent figures, including writer KR Meera, poet and critic K Satchidanandan, and activists K Ajitha and Eliyamma Vijayan.
Meanwhile, Shaji chose to respond to Indu’s allegations by slapping a legal notice against her, accusing her of defaming him by “raising false and frivolous allegations and imputations.” In a notice dated October 1, 2024, he accused Indu of flouting the terms of her agreement with KSFDC and “causing unnecessary harm and harassment to the employees.”
The struggles with ‘Nila’
When her film Nila was first selected for the KSFDC’s ‘Films Directed by Women’ project, Indu was ecstatic that she would finally get to see her dream realised. The excitement, however, quickly devolved into disappointment, Indu recalled, as she was taken aback by the attitude exhibited by Shaji and the KSFDC team towards the project. “The entire team exhibited a dismissive attitude towards us from the very beginning. They seemed to take the project lightly, almost as a joke,” she said.
Though the production’s budget was set at Rs 1.5 crore, Indu said the team made “many basic things” unavailable. Budget constraints were frequently cited as a reason for the lack of resources, she said, even though Nila didn’t require a large budget due to its limited settings and cast. “There were deliberate delays in releasing the allocated funds, which severely affected our schedule. All budget-related decisions were made by the film’s line producer without consulting me, and there was very little transparency,” she said.
These delays also forced Indu to dip into her own pocket on multiple occasions, she said, ultimately pushing her into personal debt.
Indu also had concerns about the line producer, who was hand-picked by the KSFDC, allegedly without proper checks. “This was his first time working as a line producer. Coming from a corporate background myself, it was clear to me that something was wrong with how the budget was being managed,” she said, adding that the process of selecting technicians and assembling teams for various departments was also unnecessarily prolonged.
Indu said she made several attempts to raise her concerns with the chairman, first through email and then in person. Each time, however, his response was to avoid getting involved, she said. “Despite meeting him multiple times to discuss production issues, he kept stonewalling us. He also never bothered to watch the film or provide feedback, making it clear he had no interest in any of the films under the government project.”
It wasn’t until much later, when Indu filed a formal complaint with the Ministry of Culture in April 2023, that the project finally began to move forward.
Indu was grateful to the Ministry for their intervention, but the complaint allegedly made the KSFDC team more resentful towards her.
“Despite the film being scheduled for release on August 4 (2023), there was no clarity on distribution, marketing, or music rights until July 20. I had to repeatedly remind officials, through letters and phone calls, even after the deadlines agreed upon in meetings had passed,” Indu said.
By the time the tender was called, the team only had a limited window of about two weeks to promote the movie, Indu said. “For a film, time is like oxygen,” she added, “There is no explanation for such negligence other than deliberate sabotage.”
Indu’s decision to call out this attitude and question the crises she had to face during the filming did little to benefit her, as the KSFDC authorities allegedly resorted to further vindictive behaviour. “There are witnesses to the KSFDC chairman stating that I wasn’t worthy of filmmaking, and that he would ensure none of my future films see the light of the day,” Indu said.
Athulya P, a former KSFDC employee, confirmed to TNM that she had heard the chairman make such a statement. “I have also seen the senior officials at KSFDC deliberately humiliate both Mini IG and Indu Lakshmi at meetings,” she said.
In a Facebook post in July 2023, just days before the film’s release, Indu wrote, “For them to ‘empower’ women, we have to surrender our self-respect. We must submit ourselves completely, ask no questions, and accept our subservience. We are not worthy of reacting, complaining, or expressing our opinions. Our academic and professional backgrounds don't matter. We are just women.”
By the time Indu’s film Nila was released in August 2023 in 56 screens across the state after a long battle, the filmmaker was exhausted. Instead of joy, all she felt was relief that she was now done with the project.
In October 2024, as she basked in the success of her second film, Appuram, being selected for the International Competition section of the 29th International Film Festival of Kerala (IFFK), she realised her fight was far from over.
Shaji had just served her with a legal notice for defamation.
What went down with ‘Divorce’
Actor-filmmaker Mini IG’s experience with the KSFDC mirrored many of the challenges faced by Indu Lakshmi. Mini was one of the first two directors selected for the state government’s women’s film project, and soon learnt that the opportunity came with many caveats. The other director was Tara Ramanujam, who would go on to direct Nishiddho, winning the Second Best Film award at the 52nd Kerala State Film Awards.
Speaking to TNM, Mini said, “Stressing budget constraints, the KSFDC authorities asked us to compromise on many aspects of my vision for the film. Some exterior shots had to be cut, and the chairman insisted that at least 40% of the film be shot inside Chitranjali Studio (managed by KSFDC). I accepted most of these conditions without question, despite knowing they would affect the quality of her film.”
As she began working on the film, Mini had realised that the project could benefit from some budget reallocations, even within the fixed fund of Rs 1.5 crore. The KSFDC, however, refused to allow her this flexibility. “I was also not given enough time for the film's pre-production, as they had set a very tight deadline,” she said.
A few days into the shooting schedule, the KSFDC team allegedly told her that she only had to concern herself with the creative side of the project, as the organisation would handle the financial aspects. “This was contrary to what we were told initially. But I later realised that there was a lot of bureaucratic red-tape and institutional corruption happening behind the scenes. That was why we were asked to stay away from the ‘other side’ of the production,” she alleged.
Despite the roadblocks, Mini eventually completed the shoot in just 24 days. But then came a new set of problems, she said. Although Divorce was the first film to be completed under the prestigious government project, KSFDC kept postponing its release, citing various reasons.
“After completing my film in 2020 and setting multiple release dates, all to no avail, I was finally told Divorce would be released in September 2022. Everything including the teaser and promos were ready, but once again, they went back on their word,” Mini recalled. In an exhausting turn of events for the filmmaker, she was informed that Tara Ramanujam’s Nishiddhowould be released first.
In a 2022 interview with TNM, Mini recounted how her attempts to speak to chairman Shaji N Karun further let her down. When she initially emailed him to ask why her film’s release had been delayed again, she received no response. She then reached out to KSFDC managing director Maya N, who asked to meet in person. During the meeting, the chairman told Mini that they decided to release Nishiddho first because it was gaining recognition, having been featured in film festivals and even winning a Kerala State Award.
When Mini pointed out that her film was the first to get the censor certificate, the chairman’s alleged response was that it was up to them, the KSFDC authorities, to decide which film should be released first. “I reminded him that the films were funded with public money, and the public should have a say in this. The chairman then told me that the government had only instructed the KSFDC to produce films, not to release them,” she said.
Mini was startled to hear such statements from a veteran filmmaker like Shaji. “I asked him if our films were meant to be kept locked away in a box. Even then, his only response was that it was their decision to make,” she said.
Sajitha Madathil, theatre and film actor and former deputy director of the Kerala Chalachitra Academy, had come to Mini’s support at the time, pointing out in an Instagram post that there have been several complaints about how the KSFDC was handling the project. “How KSFDC behaved throughout the production process is a prime example of how a government institution can ruin good initiatives. As someone who has witnessed the struggles these women faced, I have no hesitation in standing with Mini. The reasons for the delay in Divorce’s release should have been communicated to her in a respectful and democratic manner,” she wrote.
Sajitha also called upon the Department of Cultural Affairs to take the initiative to understand how this project is being executed by consulting with the women who are part of the project, and making necessary corrections.
Around this time, much like Indu would a year later, Mini also approached the then Minister of Culture Saji Cherian with a complaint. Though the minister immediately called up the KSFDC MD and directed that the film be released soon, nothing was done, alleged Mini. “Instead, the authorities started behaving even more vindictively,” she said.
Mini subsequently submitted complaints to Chief Minister Pinarayi Vijayan, other ministers in the Cabinet, and even MV Govindan, the Kerala State Secretary of the Communist Party of India (Marxist) [CPI(M)]. “The KSFDC was eventually forced to set a release date, but they did not make it easy for me. I was verbally abused and humiliated in the meetings. The KSFDC chairman told me that people like me should not have received this opportunity, that I didn’t know anything and this chance should have gone to someone with more experience,” she said.
Mini’s patience seemed to pay off when Divorce was finally scheduled for release in February 2023, but that happiness was short-lived. The film was pulled from theatres within three days, she said, noting that this was the same fate that befell Indu’s Nila as well.
Besides, though a budget of Rs 25 lakh was allocated for the marketing of the film, Mini alleged that very little was done in that regard. “It was all just for show. I suggested ideas like flash-mobs for promotion, but they claimed the money was set aside for flexes and hoardings. But none of that materialised,” she said. “I still don’t know where all that money went.”
Mini’s film, along with others produced under the government project, was eventually released on the state’s own OTT platform, C-Space. However, it remains inaccessible due to technical issues with the app. “Many people have told me that they can’t even make a payment to view the film because something is wrong with the app interface. To date, nothing has been done to fix this,” she added.
Institutional misogyny
According to Athulya, the former KSFDC employee who bore witness to much of the harassment faced by Indu and Mini, the actions of the organisation’s authorities reflect the systemic misogyny that it condoned and facilitated.
“This is an institutional problem at the KSFDC, where a section of the staff believes they can get away with anything,” alleged Athulya. She recalled how the team she was part of, the ‘Special Project Group’ which was established to “ensure the effective and efficient management of various projects under KSFDC” — was derogatorily referred to as the ‘Special Prostitute Group’ by some people within the corporation. The group was mostly made up of women, with just one man among its members.
“That was the attitude many people there had towards women. If the few women employees didn’t act subservient or smile at them, they would be subjected to vile comments and rumours,” she added.
Athulya said she raised these concerns with the Film Officer — who works under the KSFDC to facilitate film projects — and also wrote letters to the MD, but no inquiry was conducted. “Even the people in the Internal Committee [against sexual harassment] have made terrible comments about women, but no one has been held accountable. The senior authorities, including the KSFDC chairman, nurture this environment by ignoring the issues and playing favourites,” she said.
Notably, there is already an ongoing case against Shaji with the Kerala State Human Rights Commission. The case was filed by a KSFDC employee, who has accused him of deliberate workplace harassment. The case is still being heard and was even discussed in the Kerala Assembly in July 2024.
Hena Devadas, a film society activist, also alleged to TNM that she faced targeted harassment from Shaji while serving as the Kerala regional secretary for the Federation of Film Societies of India (FFSI) in 2023. At the time, Shaji was the vice-president of the federation. “He had a habit of ridiculing my work and publicly humiliating me during meetings, without citing any legitimate reason. He constantly exhibited a feudal attitude, as if he were the ultimate authority on everything,” Henna said.
“Among his allegations against me was that I wasn’t ‘obeying’ him simply because I disagreed with him. On one occasion, he even claimed in an email that I seemed to have ’multiple personalities.’ I work in the medical field, I know what such statements mean. He was seeking to tag me as mentally unsound,” she alleged.
He also allegedly sent emails to the Directorate of Health Services, where she was employed, claiming that she had been suspended from the cultural society. “My department had nothing to do with the cultural spheres I engaged in. The sole intention was to humiliate me. Another matter is that he also did not have the authority to suspend me,” she said.
The activist added that she had reported concerns about Shaji’s workplace behaviour to the relevant authorities. She said she had also shared her experiences at a committee meeting of the FFSI in 2024, following which Shaji lost the subsequent election.
Favouritism and recruitment irregularities
Some other allegations against KSFDC go even deeper, extending to favouritism and manipulations in the recruitment process via the Kerala Public Service Commission (PSC). Athulya alleged that those in charge at KSFDC attempted to favour personal associates and union leaders in appointments, despite the corporation being a government-funded organisation. There are also accusations that positions that are not specified in the recruitment rules were created for certain individuals, with salaries disbursed on a monthly basis.
Several Right to Information (RTI) applications filed by concerned parties over the past few years lend weight to these allegations.
Athulya’s own complaint concerned the appointment of a Production Assistant under notification category number 200/2020. The interview for this position was conducted on November 16, 2020, and was intended to be a direct recruitment process. However, although three candidates attended the final interview, only two names allegedly appeared on the rank list. Athulya, who was one of the candidates, found that her name was absent from the final list.
That was when she decided to file an RTI request, only to discover that the irregularities in the KSFDC’s recruitment process ran much deeper. This included document forgery during the hiring process, which Athulya alleged was done with the knowledge of senior officials at the KSFDC.
The person who eventually got hired as the Production Assistant was already a KSFDC employee, working as a Project Assistant (Engineer) on a contract basis since November 29, 2019. According to KSFDC’s RTI response, when this individual applied for a job in 2019, he claimed to have worked at only two engineering-related firms after completing his BTech from the University of Kerala in 2016.
However, another RTI response issued by the PSC on November 19, 2022, contradicted this claim. According to this document, when he applied for the Production Assistant role in 2020, he stated that he had worked as a Production Assistant/Editor at Vibeszon Movies in Ernakulam for a total of “three years, six months, and 25 days.” He had also submitted a work experience certificate from this company.
“I have to point out that this man had only worked at KSFDC since November 2019, and before that, as per KSFDC’s own RTI response, he had work experience solely as an engineer. Yet, by the following year, he suddenly had a three-year experience certificate from a film production company, and no one seemed to question it. He was directly hired instead,” Athulya said.
The PSC’s RTI response also noted that the experience certificate had been validated by a five-member committee at the KSFDC before being submitted to the PSC. In a complaint submitted to then Kerala Governor Arif Mohammed Khan, Athulya cited these documents, alleging it was a “grave offence” that the five-member committee had approved the forged certificate, despite the KSFDC MD being “aware of the matter in writing.”
She further alleged that a senior KSFDC officer, who was a member of the PSC interview board, had been “complicit in this scheme by deliberately hiding relevant information during the interview, despite his knowledge of the situation.” She also pointed out that all of this was occurring under the leadership of Shaji N Karun, which meant he can’t run away from this responsibility.
Athulya had submitted complaints to the Chief Minister’s Office, the PSC Chairman, and even the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, but received no response.
Eventually, on the Governor’s orders, the Vigilance department formed an investigation team to look into the allegations. “There is no update on that case yet,” she said. “He is still working as a Production Assistant at KSFDC.”
Meanwhile, in a seeming bid to placate Athulya, the KSFDC offered her, along with three others, appointments to the post of ‘Documentary Assistant’.
Athulya, who was in need of a job, accepted the offer. However, as soon as she joined, she alleged, she was labelled an enemy by seniors at the KSFDC — painted as a whistleblower of sorts for filing an RTI regarding the PSC appointment process. “It was a hostile environment. People there have deliberately tried to get me fired,” she said.
After Athulya’s agreement was renewed for a second year, the organisation’s financial manager allegedly randomly cut her attendance and that of two other women trainees. “At KSFDC, it is common practice to mark the evening’s attendance the following morning. Even if we went to sign in the evening, they would ask why we couldn’t just do it the next day. But one fine day, our attendances were cut, with the reason being that we didn’t sign off in the evening,” she recalled.
Seeing that her attendance was cut, Athulya had taken a photo of the attendance book as proof. When she informed her reporting officer, who was the nodal officer for OTT, about what happened, he allegedly asked her to send him the photo. She later got a show-cause memo, accusing her of photographing and circulating official documents. “I had only sent the picture to my reporting officer, and that too because he asked. It was a clear attempt at workplace harassment,” she said.
Her explanation was deemed unsatisfactory, and she was informed that her contract would be terminated. “They later gave me papers stating that the contract should be ended early because there was no film production underway. So, after a one-month notice period, I was fired,” she said. Her contract was supposed to end in January 2025.
Though the reason KSFDC cited to fire her was that there was no documentary production underway, and therefore there was no need for a ‘Documentary Assistant’, Athulya said she was working in the OTT department at the time. “I was responsible for everything from the start of the OTT project,” she said.
In the end, she was even denied a salary for an entire month. “The office claimed that it was compensation for a work trip we had taken. But as far as I know, this money wasn’t taken from anyone else who travelled with us,” she alleged.
Course correction
In the wake of the legal notice issued by Shaji N Karun against Indu Lakshmi, the Women in Cinema Collective (WCC) sent an official letter to the KSFDC chairman, condemning the move and stating that this was a “perfect way to break the spirit of an upcoming woman filmmaker.” This, the collective noted, echoed the concerns raised in the Hema Committee report about women being “silenced by the powers that be,” when they use their constitutional rights to speak up.
In the letter, the collective further questioned the “strong-arm tactics” being used to shut down voices like Indu’s. They pointed out that instead of accepting feedback and taking positive action, KSFDC’s authorities were taking the criticisms personally.
“This innovative move by the Kerala government must not be jeopardised due to the lack of a proper system [in place]. Many marginalised filmmakers are in need of this support and encouragement,” the WCC stated in the letter, urging Shaji to withdraw the legal notice and address the issues raised through discussions with all stakeholders.
The WCC had also raised the issue at a meeting concerning the drafting of the state’s film policy.
In a Facebook post in December 2024, filmmaker Bijukumar Damodaran, known mononymously as Dr Biju, had highlighted the irony of the government promoting IFFK 2024 as “women-centric,” while neglecting to resolve the problems faced by women filmmakers working within the government framework. “The KSFDC’s handling of the situation, including its issuance of threats against filmmakers and the use of legal notices to silence them, is an attempt to suppress dissent and an example of state-level authoritarianism,” Dr Biju alleged.
The filmmaker said there is an urgent need for an audit of the KSFDC’s handling of these projects. “The government should address the complaints of the filmmakers, take corrective action, and ensure that such practices are not repeated. The government’s approach of claiming to support women and marginalised communities in public, but failing to protect them in practice, must also be re-evaluated,” he said.
Dr Biju pointed out that several filmmakers selected by the KSFDC have faced significant mental strain due to delays in funding and other issues, leading some to take on debts to complete their projects. “Some directors have also been forced into unfavourable production conditions, which have affected the quality of their films,” he said.
VS Sanoj, a journalist-turned-filmmaker whose film Ariku was made under a similar government project for filmmakers from Scheduled Castes (SC) and Scheduled Tribes (ST), said he had three suggestions to the KSFDC for improving the outcomes of the project.
“The first thing the KSFDC can do is to create a more director-friendly work atmosphere,” Sanoj told TNM. “Filmmakers chosen for the project are typically new and come in with a lot of hope and expectations, but the existing environment is not very motivating. This should change.”
Secondly, Sanoj emphasised the need for a more efficient and timely fund allocation process. “The 25-day time limit is set with the expectation that we will spend a certain amount of money each day,” he explained. “But the problem is that even if we spend very little on a day’s shoot, we aren’t allowed to extend the shoot by an extra day. This is not logically correct.”
He also noted that the KSFDC refused to release funds for the additional day he needed to finish his shoot, even though the overall budget remained within the allotted amount. “For the 26th day, I had to pay for everything, including the camera rental,” he said.
Thirdly, Sanoj said, KSFDC’s current strategy to market these films is rather poor. “These are small films; they don’t require huge marketing budgets. But the marketing efforts should be streamlined and made more effective,” he added.
Sanoj’s film Ariku is now set for release after prolonged delays.
TNM reached out to Shaji N Karun by phone, but he said he could not respond to the allegations as a case was currently underway. In a separate email, he stated that the allegations “are to be proved by law in court.”
This report was republished from The News Minute as part of The News Minute-Newslaundry alliance. Read about our partnership here and become a subscriber here.
Newslaundry is a reader-supported, ad-free, independent news outlet based out of New Delhi. Support their journalism, here.
