AFRICAN 
CINEMA 
film policy and the 
development 
has upgraded from its folk root to the height 
of academic contemplation, may be said to 
be limited in scope as each ethnic group 
defines its space within this larger political 
configuration. The Egba (Yoruba), for instance, 
would restrict their artistic manifestation 
to their cultural history, so that this 
cultural expression isiimited in scope. While 
its relevance in the totality of cultural manifestation 
is not in doubt, its significance is 
restricted to a defined ethnic unit. Such examples 
exist everywhere in the West African 
subregion. This is a region that is abundantly 
expressed in ethnic multiplicity. 
But while this subregion has known many 
such cultural festivals, none of these festivals 
have proved to wield such momentous and 
stupendous influence on the people across 
of the 
ONOOKOME OKOME 
There are many rich cultural 
events in the West-African 
sub region. These multifac 
eted, multimedia and 
polyvocal cultural events 
have been recorded in this 
region in many anthropological studies and 
lately in studies dealing with performance 
and theatrical shows. Bakare Traore's book. 
Black Africa Theatre is one major example 
dealing with some of these artistic expressions. 
Oyin Ogunba and Abiola Irele's Theatre 
in Africa is another such book. Theatre in 
Africa, a collection of essays on ancient and 
contemporary artistic expression deals with 
the Nigerian state, otherwise, designated as 
an Anglophone state. These cultural expressions, 
referred to by Ogunba and Irele as 
'veritable carnivals,' a phrase which Bakhtin 
ethnic line, cultural divide, religious affiliations 
and political choices as the medium of 
cinema. This medium has come to mean so 
many things to so many people in this subcontinent. 
Like no artistic expression before 
its arrival, the cinema quickly moved from 
the periphery of the cultural life of these 
people to the centre. This movement was as 
swift as it was telling. Sembene Ousmane, 
the grand aesthete of this medium, has wonderful 
recollections of this medium in its 
early days; 'In the book on the history of 
cinematography, this part of Africa is terra 
incognita. In spite of their age, (African 
filmmakers) they have cleared the path with 
determination and a youth spirit'. What 
looked like a virgin area of artistic expression 
has now taken its own coloration. 
Sembene Ousmane knows this. He helped in
more than one way to make this possible. The 
rapid acceptance of this medium he makes 
obvious when he declares, 'Nowadays, there 
is not a single film festival without the participation 
of at least one film from us'. The 
cinema, according to him, is an evening 
school. This is the cinema which Clyde Taylor 
refers to as the 'Last cinema,' meaning that 
African cinema is the last to develop close 
links with its cultural and political roots. So 
far, in the last thirty years or so, a new 
cultural fact has emerged - the fact of our 
existence in the 'movies' or the flickers as the 
British would put it. Individually our response 
to this medium has been enthusiastic, 
almost frenzied in some place. From one 
West-African country to the other, the medium 
has grown tremendously. The subregion 
accepted the medium and the product which 
its sells; and inevitably accepted the content 
which the product brings to us. Because there 
was little control over what kind of films was 
initially brought to the West-African 
subregion, European and American distribution 
and exhibition cartels held the captive 
market spell-bound for a long time. These 
These policy options have had telling impact on the development 
of the cinema industry in West-Africa, The French 
system of indirect rule has telling effects on the development 
of the cinema industry and French West-Africa, some 
of which are lingering today. 
cartels distributed and exhibited their films 
in the West-African subregion; leaving little 
space for the development of an indigenous 
West-African cinema industry. Not long after 
the introduction of this medium into this 
-region, the euphoria which attended its introduction 
began petering out, and a critical 
stance taken by a small class of people who 
saw beyond the glitter and gold of the silver 
screen. Independent artistic movements in 
the subregion added to this. Before long it 
became clear that there was the need to 
rewrite how cinema should operate and how 
people of the subregion ought to be represented. 
Sembene Ousmane, pioneer of African 
cinema, was one of those who looked 
beyond the glamour of the silver screen. And 
because colonial authorities and states of the 
West-African subregion had one form of 
cinema policy or the other in place, West- 
African filmmakers sought first and foremost 
to write-over these intimidating colonial 
policies which regulated cinema practice 
and other entertainment outlets. 
As there were two distinct kinds of colonial 
implementation of a law in 1934 called La 
Decret Laval', the purpose of which was to 
control films that were shot in Africa and to 
minimise the creative roles taken by Africans 
in such productions. It is significant to 
point out that long before 1934 when the 
Laval decree was instituted and enforced, the 
British had established the notorious, 'The 
Theaire and Public Performance Regulation 
Ordinance of 1912'. This liberal attitude 
from the French cohere simply with the ipdirect 
rule system, which sought to make Africans 
as Ftench as possible. The assumption, 
I presume, was that the French colonialist did 
not have any need for separate legislation for 
the colonies because it was assumed that all 
legislations enforced in France automatically 
qualifies for the colonies. The 1934 La Decret 
Laval was therefore an after thought. 
It is for this reason that I argue, for instance, 
that the Laval decree was concerned primarily 
with the content of films 'shot in Africa'. 
The need to control and regulate the content 
of films made in Africa was a direct way to 
control any strain of 'undue' re-interpretamanifestation 
of the attempt to stifle the 
creative potentials and the emergence of an 
independent cinema industry in Francophone 
West-Africa. The first film that suffered censorship 
under the Laval decree is Robert 
Vantier's film, Africa 50, which was clandestinely 
filmed in Ivory Coast in the 1950s. 
The second film.that got-shot down by this 
decree was Les Statues Une Aussi made by 
the French new wave filmmakers, Chris 
Marker and Alain Resnais in 1955. Under 
this repressive turn of this decree, Pauline 
Vieyra, a graduate of Institute d' Hautes 
Etudes Cinematographiques (IDEHEC), the 
same film school where Nigeria's Ola 
Balogun trained in Paris, was also denied 
permission to film Africa. 
France took on a total new attitude to the 
development of cinema culture in post-colonial 
era. In 1961, France inaugurated the 
Consortium Audio-visual International 
(C.A.I.). This organ was set up to help independent 
African nations to develop their cinema 
industries, stifled during colonialism. 
This sudden change in policy was not unconauthorities 
in West-Africa, the discussion of 
cinema development follows the colonial 
practice which Britain and France instituted 
upon the subcontinent. These policy options 
have had telling impact on the development 
of the cinema industry in West-Africa. The 
French system of indirect rule has telling 
effects on the development of the cinema 
industry and French West-Africa, some of 
which are lingering today. Indirect rule did 
provide a false situation of calm in which 
French West- Africans thought of themselves 
as French citizens and their capitals as satellites 
of Paris. The French were quite liberal 
about the regulation of the cinema industries 
in the colonies. For quite some time after 
effective colonisation, nothing was done to 
regulate what was shown to the local population. 
This assumption was that the population 
of the colony was one with that of 
France. As Diawara puts it, 'Unlike the British 
and the Belgians, who had colonial units, 
the French had no policy of producing films 
that were especially intended for their subjects 
in Africa. The only decision made by 
France concerning film in the colony was the 
tion of African history and culture from a 
critical African perspective. This was not in 
favour of the colonialist discourse of Africans. 
The fear that this trend might negate the 
very crux of colonialism provided the schizophrenia 
which brought about the Laval decree. 
In this connection, therefore, the Laval 
decree was the direct result of certain anticolonial 
slant in filmmaking of the 1920s and 
1930s in French West-Africa, prominent 
among this small dissident group of filmmakers 
is Jean Rouch, the so-called father of 
African ethnographic films. Diawara aptly 
sums up this situation when he says the Laval 
decree was ... believed by many filmmakers 
of this period, including Jean Rouch, to be a 
design to postpone 'the birth of Francophone 
African cinema.' Jean Rouch himself has 
this to say of the Laval decree: 'the rule was 
practically never applied against French filmmakers, 
it served only as a pretext to very 
young Africans, judged to be too turbulent by 
the colonial administration, the right to film 
their own country'. That the Laval decree 
concerned itself with 'the creative role by 
Africans in the making of films' is a clear 
47
nected with the need to keep up with what 
was going on in the former colonies, although 
the public reason for setting up the 
C.A.I, was to help develop indigenous 
Francophone cinema industry. Obviously the 
French realised that the atonement they wish 
to show for the devastated entertainment 
industries in French West-Africa could work 
in their favour in more than one way. 
Two names are consistent in the early subversion 
of the Laval decree: Jean Rouch and 
Jean-Rene Debrix. The role of both filmmakers 
in the development of Francophone West- 
African cinema is, to say the least, ambiguous, 
although I must say that they began the 
trend upon which future development was 
consolidated. 'As a potent organ of colonialism', 
to use Frank N. Ukadike's phrase,' 'the 
earliest step towards a courageous portrayal 
of the African reality 
was by Mare 
Allegret's Voyage on 
Congo(1927), anoncinematic 
record of 
Andre Gibe's travels 
in the Congo'. Since 
then there has been a 
spate of non African 
Africanists whose effort 
at defining the 
positive image of the 
continent and its people 
is worthy of note. 
While I think it is im- 
OuMiianc Sembene(Left) and Idrissa Ouedraogo (right) Courtesy Of Christine Delorme. 
portant to call into focus 
the role of Jean 
Rouch, the ethnographic 
filmmaker, it 
is necessary to be cautious 
about the influence 
which his role in French West-Africa 
filmmaking has engendered. This cautious 
note is well recorded in Ukadike's encyclopaedic 
book, Black African Cinema 'Rouch 
and his ethnographic film expedition to Africa 
called into question the whole tradition 
of ethnographic filmmaking.' For Ukadike, 
ethnographic filmmaking represented a stage 
in colonial filmmaking in West-Africa, because 
like most European attitude to non- 
European world, extraneous critical criteria 
were brought to bear upon a set of cultural 
experiences that is not European. In Ukadike's 
assessment, the exotic in African cultures 
were emphasised in ethnographic films. 
Teshome Gabriel argues that this slant is 
obvious in the early films of Rouch, not in the 
later, more articulate and fine-tuned researches 
into the 'African mind', via 'the 
growing tendency to personalise and fictionalise.' 
However, Ukadike and Diawara agree 
that Rouch's lasting and most telling contribution 
to Francophone filmmaking, indeed 
African filmmaking, is the access which his 
collaborative work with Africans gave to 
potential African filmmakers to work the 
technology of filmmaking. This was something 
denied Africans under the pernicious 
Laval decree. 
The development of cinema in Francophone 
Africa took a new turn with the inauguration 
of the C.A.I. In 1963, Jean-Rene Debrix was 
appointed director of the newly created 
Burean du Cinema at the Co-operation. Before 
this appointment, Debrix had worked in 
IDEHEC as adjunct director. His appointment 
to the top position in the C.A.I, proved 
as ambiguous as the effort of Jean Rouch in 
his ethnographic films in Africa. Before the 
appointment of Debrix, the emphasis of the 
French government through the C.A.I, was 
to help post colonial governments of 
Francophone Africa develop film units with 
the sole aim of producing newsreels and 
documentary. Debrix changed all that, arguing 
that the film will prove to be a useful way 
of telling the African story. In a very significant 
way, Debrix helped the development of 
the cinema in this subregion. There was, in 
Debrix's time at the co-operation, a radical 
neglect of the Laval decree. 
The major criticism of Debrix's contribution 
to the development of Francophone cinema 
is that he arrogated so much to himself in the 
selection of what script to finance. He became 
the lord of the creative choice. The 
policy of the French government has not 
changed since Debrix's death in 1978. 
Fespaco, the biennial film festival 
Ouagadougou is a good case in point. 
From the deliberations of Fespaci (Federation 
Panafrican de Cineastes), Fespaco came 
into existence in 1969. When it began in 
1969, 'only five African and two European 
countries participated in the Festival 
Panafricain du Cinema de Ouagadougou.' 
Today, the Fespaco organisers have expanded 
the pan-African scope of the Festival's objectives. 
The 1995 edition was quite exquisite, 
extra-ordinary. With more than 10,000 
delegates, the city of Ouagadougou witnessed 
a boom in everything - from sales of sou venir 
to the attendance boom at film screenings. 
The scope of its finances has been enlarged. 
In its early years of existence, Fespaco was 
almost solely supported by the French government. 
Owing to the dedication of its organisers 
more avenues of finance are opening 
up. The 1995 edition has a Jong list of 
such support. 
Fespaco has no 
doubt energised 
film production, 
marketing and distribution 
in the 
W e s t - A f r i c a n 
subregion. It has 
also opened up serious 
debate on the 
role of African filmmakers 
in shaping 
the future of Africa's 
culture and 
politics. This 
Fespaco has done in 
a very serious manner. 
While some critics, 
especially critics 
and filmmakers 
from Anglophone countries have argued that 
Fespaco presents and represents only French 
West-Africa, recently more countries from 
English speaking West-Africa have discovered 
the importance of this cultural festival to 
the continent. The Nigerian contingent, for 
instance, has attended the last two editions of 
Fespaco - 1993 and 1995. In a discussion 
with Malam Breudam Shehu at the 1995 edition 
of Fespaco, the Managing Director of 
the Nigerian Film Corporation (NFC) made 
the point that Fespaco is a very significant 
cultural event. He did say that there were 
organisational lapses here and there, but by 
and large, he is of the opinion that Fespaco is 
something worthy of emulation. A number 
of English speaking African films have won 
prizes at Fespaco. 
The significance of Fespaco is therefore not 
restricted to French West-Africa, but to Af- 
48
rica as a whole. It may have benefited French 
West-Africa most, but this is inevitable. It 
started there and was painstakingly nurtured 
by the governments and people of the countries 
within this block. 
The case of the development of the cinema 
industry in English West-Africa is different. 
Some Anglophone countries have only begun 
to encourage film production, distribution 
and exhibition. The governments are 
only beginning to take nominal interest in the 
industry. The cinema industry is not organised 
on a sub-regional level as it began in 
colonial French West-Africa. Infrastructure 
is weak and finance none existent. The existence 
of the industry in the different nations, 
especially Ghana and Nigeria, is only assured 
by the doggedness of independent filmmakers. 
The historical precedence is, of 
course, very crucial. Colonial Britain did not 
encourage film production in her colonies. 
I propose to discuss in some detail the content 
of all the policies on film that Nigeria has 
enacted since 1912 when the first policy 
came into existence. In addition, I will examine 
the impact of these policies on the development 
of film in Nigeria and on the Nigerian 
film, and the short-comings of these 
policies. Nigeria presents an interesting picture 
of colonial attitude to the development 
of the cinema in Anglophone West Africa. 
On the location of the film Orun Mooru 
I have identified the period in which the first 
film was screened, 1903 to the late 1950s, as 
the first phase of the film in Nigeria. Let us 
refer to this period as the crude era, not 
simply because indigenous production was 
at its foetal stages, but also became indigenous 
infrastructure did not exist. The second 
period began in the late 60s and then 
established itself as an emergent film tradition 
in the 70s with the release of Kongi's 
Harvest in 1970. I wish to designate this 
period as the beginning of Nigerian films: for 
it was from this period that we began to feel 
the tempo and temperament of indigenous 
cultural patterns in the body of the Nigerian 
film. Here, too, film as a cultural fact began 
to take indigenous habits into consideration. 
The contingency of the production of films 
during this period may, of course, be sourced 
partially in that of the first period that I have 
identified, but it is clear that a new apprehension 
of the medium and its potential in Nigerian 
took off. The third period which, by its 
indexical, iconic, and productional criteria, 
belongs to the crucial period of the Nigerian 
film, began when the age-long practices of 
the theatre of the southern Yoruba country 
was transformed into the medium -of film. 
This started in the mid-70s and became significant 
in the tableaux of the Nigerian cinema 
with the release of Aiye in 1979. 
Each of these periods of the film in Nigeria These are: the Nigerian Enterprise Promohas 
its own film culture derived from the 
complex interplay of the distribution, exhibition 
and production of films and the pattern 
of audience responses vis-a-vis the content, 
timing, ideology and ethnic peculiarity. 
My analysis of these policies and how the 
political contingencies of their various periods 
empower (or disempower) this medium 
would soon make this point clear. Suffice it 
to say that a film culture is born partly out of 
the perceived role and place of the film 
within a given society by individuals living 
within it, and it is this relationship that partly 
determines the cadence of film production. 
In the history of the film in Nigeria, we have 
had three policies specifically designed and 
promulgated to regulate, encourage and shape 
the film environment. 
They are: the Theatre and public Performance 
Regulation Ordinance, 1912; the Cinematography 
Act (1963); and the Nigerian 
Film Corporation (NFC) Decree (1979). 
However, there are other cultural documents 
that have been promulgated which may have 
been designed to further the aim and aspirations 
of film and cinema in the cultural landscape 
. 
49
John Sekka (left) and the late Orlando Martins in the film Things Fall Apart produced by Calpenny 
Company. 
tion Degree No.4 (1972); the Mass Communication 
Policy (1987); the Cultural Policy 
(1989); and the Copyright Policy (1989). 
In one way or another, these policies have 
been promulgated to cater for a viable entertainment 
environment which favours the 
growth and expansion of the film and its 
potentials in Nigeria, but the content, bias 
and direction which each of these policies 
assumed depended more on the ideological 
persuasion of the government that issued 
them. 
The first film policy was 'The Theatre and 
Public Performance Regulation Ordinance 
of 1912. This law. according Onyero 
Mgbejume, was 'proposed and published in 
the government gazette, ready to be introduced 
into the legislative council of Nigeria 
in 1912. However, there was public resentment 
over the idea of regulation and licensing 
the new industry for reasons to be discussed'. 
Although this act failed to reach the 
legislative council according to Mgbejume. 
the first Cinematographic Ordinance Act (No. 
20) was passed by the Council. Going by the 
submission of Mgbejume, the 1912 Act was 
not the first regulating document in the Nigerian 
film environment, since it was not passed 
into law However, he is or the opinion that in 
1933, the 'first' Cinematographic Ordinance 
No. 20 was passed by the legislative assem- 
W'n one way or an 
mother, these policies 
Jm^have been promulgated 
to cater for a viable 
entertainment environment 
which favours 
the growth and expansion 
of the film and its 
potentials in Nigeria, 
but the content, bias and 
direction which each of 
these policies assumed 
depended more on the 
ideological persuasion 
of the government that 
issued them. 
bly. 
Entitled, 'An Ordinance for the Better Regulation 
and Control of Cinematograph and 
Similar Exhibition and Purpose Connected 
There', it was applied to both the Lagos 
Colony and the rest of Nigeria. This Ordinance 
was the first in the industry to specifically 
create a censorship board and a censorship 
committee to determine the kind of 
films that were exhibited to the local population. 
Among the provisions set out in this 
Ordinance were that: 
(i) It was unlawful to show films on 
unlicensed premises; 
(ii) Licenses were not to be granted 
unless government was satisfied about 
the suitability and safety of the proposed 
premises; 
(iii) During the time films were being 
shown, government officials must be 
allowed in to ensure that there was no 
potential danger which might be caused by 
fire; 
(iv) The Censorship Board include the 
Director of Education and tenotherpersons 
appointed by the Governor; 
(v) The Board was empowered to appoints 
from time, to time C e n s o r s h i p 
Committee; 
(vi) Films and posters were not allowed 
to be displayed unless approval had 
been given; 
(vii) The Committee was empowered to 
screen films and examine posters; 
(viii) Owners of censored films have the 
right to appeal forfurther hearing; and 
(ix) Private home movies were not covered 
by the law. 
The 1933 Cinematographic Ordinance, 
Mgbejume tells us, underwent series of mutations, 
first in 1934 when it was radically 
redefined in many respects; in 1941, 1944 
and 1964. 
Properly considered, therefore, the 1963 Cinematography 
Act is actually an advancement 
of the 1933 Cinematographic Ordinance 
which regulated the film environment during 
the early days of film in Nigeria. 
Although Hyginus Ekwuazi contests the fact 
that the 1912 Ordinance Act was not passed 
50
into law, thereby making it the first of such 
laws passed in this country which regulated 
entertainment, a critical examination of both 
the 1912 and 1933 which underwent mutation 
into the 1963 Cinematographic shows 
that their contents are not altogether different. 
Perhaps the point I should make here is 
that the 1933 Act was, in fact, an improvement 
of the 1912 "Theatre and Public Performance 
Act' For as Ekwuazi points out', 
"The Theatre and Public Performance Regulation 
Ordinance' has two parts: 'The first 
which dealt with issues of license as it affected 
the venue: by this, stage plays (and 
this included the cinematographic) could be 
exhibited only in • • ~H buildings as were duly 
licensed for SUCH , .- ormances. Otherwise, 
the exhibitor incurred a penalty of N20 (then 
equivalent of about N40) for each day of 
performance. The other part of the Ordinance 
mandated that for a license of exhibition 
to e granted for any such performance, a 
detailed description of the play was to be 
furnished to the licensing officer infringement 
of this attracted a fine of #50 (then 
about N100) (1990:4).' 
Both Ordinances, in various guises, manifested 
the latent political interest of imperialist 
ideology . 
These Ordinances removed the sphere of 
actual production from indigenous peoples. 
Ekwuazi makes this point when he asserts 
that: 'From scripting and directing, through 
shooting to editing and sounding, Africans 
featured only in significantly minor roles. 
Even when traditional African stories were 
solicited for scripting such stories ended up 
being slanted to reflect the stance, the bias 
and predilection of the producer (the CFU): 
production policies were formulated over 
and above the heads of Africans for whom 
and with whom the films were made.' 
The shortcomings of these Ordinances, inimical 
to the even development of indigenous 
film production, were therefore inscribed 
in both documents. But while these 
Ordinances did not favour the even development 
of all aspects of the film in Colonial 
Nigeria, both Ordinances were harsh on the 
feature (narrative) film. Ostensibly, because 
colonial cinema was based on the ideological 
practice which sought to further a discourse 
pattern which favoured and legitimised colonialism, 
the documentary genre was favoured. 
From the reading of both Ordinances, two 
points stand out clear. First, the attempt to 
keep the local population outside the entertainment 
arena, and secondly, the expediency 
to develop only those facets of the 
industry that the colonialist thought favourable 
to his ideological practice. Situated 
within this practice was the pernicious distortion 
of the Blackbody. The Blackbody in 
these films featured not as signifier of autonomous 
authority, but as a vast untraversed 
map, a territory waiting to be inscribed upon. 
The implementation of these Ordinances and 
the implicit colonialist discourse therein 
brought further a film culture in the early part 
of the development of film in Nigeria that 
was (and still is) ambivalent, alien and inconsequential 
to the cultural roots of the indigenous 
population. An attitude to film icon 
became the vogue: that attitude which the 
indigene took to the film image as some 
fictive interpretation that lacked any significant 
anchor in real life. The shortfall of this 
attitude is with us today. We have not totally 
imbibed the film image as an approximation 
to the life we crave for. the whole complex 
machinery of cinema as an image-making 
factory, at least not when it tells about us. By 
entrenching the filmic image that is farfetched 
to the aspiration of the local population, 
early cinema in Nigeria demobilised its 
potency. It became elitist, bourgeois. 
The content of 'The Theatre and Public Performance 
Ordinance' and 'An Ordinance of 
The Better Regulation and Control of Cinematograph 
and Similar Exhibition and Purposes 
Connected Therewith' fostered this 
culture and encouraged parochial cinema 
development in colonial Nigeria. 
No doubt, the 1963 Cinematograph Act is a 
carry over from the legacy of colonial cinema. 
It bears the imprints and pretensions of 
colonial cinema in its operation and in the 
negation of significant approval of the local 
population for which it was adapted. Indeed, 
someone has ventured to say that it is a copy 
of the Cinematograph Act of England. If it is, 
then, the wholesale adoption gave it a biased 
slant, and made it, from the very beginning of 
its operation, inadequate. 
However, I think it would be useful to look at 
the Act closely and show why it became 
inadequate in this society, and why the Nigerian 
Film Corporation Decree of 1979 became 
inevitable. 
First, this Act, like the ones that came before, 
empowers the Minister of Information to 
constitute a Board of Censors. This Board is 
thereafter put in the position to censor films 
that are produced and exhibited in Nigeria 
and those imported into the country. The 
Board, this Act glibly states, should comprise 
'fit persons and organisations representing 
the thought and opinions of persons 
resident in Nigeria'. The vagueness of this 
term of reference is of course not lost to us. 
How does one determine the 'fitness of people' 
who ought to censor films meant for 
public consumption? Who determines the 
fitness of the members of this Board? 
Ekwuazi illustrates the problem of such ambiguous 
terms and shows the formation of 
three such Boards, pointing out how these 
loosely defined terms of reference could be 
read from different positions of bias. These 
biased readings were, according to Ekwuazi, 
apparent in the constituted Boards of 1959, 
1971 and 1977. Supporting his claims with 
the University of Lagos study, he concludes 
that the Boards constituted for 1971 and 
1977 were made up of members over 40 
years of age and goes on to point out the 
paternalism that such bias caused in the development 
of the film industry and in the 
culture of the film audience. It is significant 
to point here that the research which Ekwuazi 
(1984)1 undertook, entitled 'Findings from 
the Lagos and Ibadan Cinema Audience Surveys' 
and that of Onookome Okome (1990) 
entitled 'The Sociology of the Folkloric Cinema 
in Nigeria' show clearly that the major 
patrons of Nigerian Cinema are found among 
teenagers. The group constitutes more than 
sixty per cent (60%) of the total film-going 
audience. As Ekwuazi points out in his study, 
this age bracket was born in the film era - the 
global film culture. The Boards constituted 
in 1971 and 1977 would have ignored this 
important variable in their deliberation. Apart 
from these Boards, there have been ad hoc 
Boards created at irregular interval, but there 
is no evidence to show that they surmounted 
this problem that we stated here. 
A second problem is the criteria under which 
the Board would grant a film screening licence. 
Approval would not be given under 
the these conditions: undermine national security; 
induce or reinforce corruption of private 
or public morally; encourage illegal and 
criminal acts; expose peoples of African decent 
to ridicule and contempt; and encourage 
racial, religious and ethnic discrimination 
and conflict. (Ekwuazi, 1991). 
Although the Board is vested with the power 
of censoring both domestic and imported 
films, there is a portion in the Act which 
effectively delimits the Board's sphere of 
influence. This section excludes certain 
classes of cinematographic films from being 
censored. These are short films that take no 
longer than five minutes to exhibit, such as 
8mm films and 'any film imported, produced 
and issued by the direction of the govern- 
51
ment of the federation or any state; the diplomatic 
representative of any commonwealth 
or foreign country, the United Organisation 
or any organ of that organisation or any 
educational, scientific or cultural body or 
society, including broadcasting and television 
organisation'. 
The problems inherent here are enormous. 
The vagueness of the term 'imported films' 
that is kept outside the Board's power is a 
negation of national security and may be a 
source of the denigration of our cultural 
value as recent events have shown. This is a 
big gap. It is equally amazing why the 8mm 
film is excluded from censorship. If we realised 
the potential of this film gauge in the 
experimental work of foreigners on our land, 
the dimension of distorted images encased in 
them, then this particular condition becomes 
a serious oversight or a deliberate copy of 
colonial cinema which the adopters of this 
colonial Act failed to see. 
astly, the provision that 
stipulates the punish 
ment of offences 
committed is rather 
mild. Besides, since 
there was no moni 
toring arm in the 
Ministry of Information, 
this Act became only apiece of 'government 
paper', as the saying goes. It did not 
touch the average film goer or the exhibitor. 
Furthermore, as the Board and its parent 
body never exercised any control over the 
importation of film, it was doubtful if they 
had any input in the actualisation of the Act 
in this direction. They never had. The evidence 
before us shows that the importation of 
films soared in the 70s and even the Nigerian 
Film Distribution Company (NFDC) imported 
foreign films for screening, about 80 
per cent of total screen schedule between 
January and December 1982. If we put this 
together with the nefarious activities of Lebanese 
businessmen in the film exhibition and 
distribution network and the activities of 
AMPECA, the situation became rather pathetic- 
a massive influx of foreign films which 
the Censorship Board had no direct control 
over. It must be added here that the influx of 
video machines and satellite dishes made the 
censorship climate even more porous. 
The call for restatement of government on 
policy matters and the encouragement of the 
film industry as an indigenous form of entertainment 
predated the 1979 seminar on film 
and culture organised by the National Council 
for Art and Culture, Lagos. However, it 
was the culmination of the call to create a 
body which should take charge of this important 
aspect of our cultural life. In any case, 
this call was a recognition of the inadequacies 
and failures of former legislations. From 
the beginning, therefore, the Nigerian Film 
Corporation Decree was laced with an enormous 
task. It had to shed the appendages of 
colonial cinema and then set the pace by its 
own agenda for indigenous film production 
in Nigeria. 
i o this end. the Nigerian 
Film Corporation 
Decree has made sig 
nificant progress. 
The Decree enlarged 
the narrow interest 
group formation of 
the 1963 Cinematograph 
Act to include specialists in performance, 
literary and cultural activities as members 
of the Board. It also includes indigenous 
filmmakers for the first time. Properly 
indigenised, the Corporation was inaugurated 
to carry out these functions. 
(a) the production of films for domestic 
consumption and for export; 
(b) the establishment an maintenance 
of facilities for film production; 
(c) the encouragement of production 
by Nigerians of film through financial 
and other forms of assistance; 
(d) the encouragement of the development 
of cinematographic theatres by Nigerian 
by way of financial and other forms of 
assistance; 
the acquisition and distribution of (e) 
films; 
(0 the provision of facilities for training 
and advancing the skills and talents 
of persons employed in the Nigerian film 
industry generally and the conduct of research 
into the matters pertaining to film 
production and the film industry as a 
whole; and 
(g) the carrying out of such activities as 
may be necessary or expedient for the 
full discharge of all or any of the functions 
conferred on it under or pursuant to this 
Decree (Nigerian Film Corporation decree, 
1979, No. 61; p. A430). 
Undoubtedly, these are laudable goals. In 
fact, the Decree is a timely re-writing of the 
film industry. Apart from the resuscitation of 
the place of the indigenous filmmaker in the 
tableaux of the Nigerian film, four of the 
functions are particularly noteworthy: the 
establishment and maintenance of facilities 
for film production; the encouragement of 
the development of cinematography theatres 
by Nigerians by way of financial and other 
assistance; the establishment and maintenance 
of a national film archive, and the 
provision of training and advancing the skills 
and talents of persons employed in the Nigerian 
film industry. 
There is no doubt that the most outstanding 
problem militating against the viable 
productional aspect of the film industry is the 
lack or total absence of film production 
infastructural units such as laboratories, editing 
studios, etc. It would be recalled that the 
situation was so acute that Sanya Dosunmu, 
a filmmaker, began setting up his film laboratory 
in the 70s, but he was soon priced out 
of business as he found out that cost of 
equipment escalated all to often. The Decree 
took cognisance of this. And the Film Corporation 
under the leadership of Shehu Brendan 
has seen to it that these infrastructural units 
are put in place. Although it is not clear if the 
Corporation has done anything to encourage 
indigenous ownership of cinema exhibitions 
halls, it is hoped that it will in due course. 
n any case, it would be necessary 
to increase the frequency of in 
digenous film production be 
fore engaging in this aspect of 
the provision of the Decree be 
cause an increase in local films 
will justify money spent on lo 
cal film halls by business people. 
Although it is not clear if this is the 
attitude which the Corporation holds, one 
cannot but hold the opinion that this may well 
serve its purpose. 
Perhaps the finest provision of the function 
of the Corporation is that which emphasises 
the setting up of a film archive. The significance 
of this provision places, on a very 
comfortable place, the cultural dimension of 
film, a popular medium in Nigeria, as it is 
elsewhere. I have argued elsewhere that as a 
means of reconstructing political, cultural 
and social history, film archives are indispensable. 
This is especially so in a society 
such as ours where there is an acute lack of 
documentation. The 1979 Decree which set 
up the Nigerian Film Corporation settled this 
matter and the administrative machinery saw 
to its implementation. 
It is also noteworthy to point out that tFBs 
Decree also made provision for the training 
of those engaged in the industry. This provi- 
52
sion has not been quite put to test. The reason, 
I presume, has to do with the fact that the 
Corporation has not set up its academy. Such 
an academy would, when operational, take 
care of training staff and other categories of 
workers in the industry. 
There is no doubting the fact that the 1979 
Decree which set up the Nigerian Film Corporation 
(NFC) began a new phrase in the 
history of the Nigerian cinema. So far, it has 
beenthemostpracticalandresult-onenied.lt 
has, as I have pointed out, rewritten Ihc place 
of film in Nigeria. More than anything else, 
the execution of the functions assigned to the 
NFC has carried forward the aspiration of 
this Decree, especially the years beginning 
from 1985 to date. 
I have discussed the 1912, 1963 and 1979 
legislations as they affect the development of 
the film industry in sonic detail, but while I 
have dealt with the first two as documents, I 
have consciously read the last (1979) as both 
a document and a realisation. The reason lor 
this is obvious. Until now, the only legislation 
that carried within its written (theoretical) 
outlook a comprehensive unambiguous 
framework is the 1979 Decree. Besides, at 
the level of implementation, the success recorded 
so far in less than a decade far outruns 
whatever gains the practice of the other two 
legislations could garner. Backed by the Nigerian 
Enterprises Promotion Decree of 1972. 
and the indigenisation euphoria of the period, 
the brains behind the 1979 Film Decree 
came up with a near perfect master plan. 
Both the Mass Communication Policy (1967) 
and the National Cultural Policy (1989) have 
similar content. They aredeclamatorily complimentary 
to the 1979 Decree. While the 
1979 Decree establishing the Nigerian Film 
Corporation emphasises the creation, maintenance 
and sustenance of structures within 
the film industry, the Mass Communication 
Policy and the National Cultural Policy do no 
more than spell out the role of film in national 
development. In fact, the Communication 
Policy even specifies the role of the NFC: the 
body that is saddled with the functions of 
providing basic infrastrucutral facilities for 
the industry. It is also important to point out 
that the Copyright Law (Decree No 47 of 
December, 1988) of Nigeria recognises the 
eligibility of the cinematograph for copyright. 
Although I have argued here that the NFC 
pushed the film industry a step further, and 
that the import of this push may become 
more evident in a couple of years, certain 
comments and suggestions are necessary at 
Oumarou Canda (right) in L'exile (1981) 
this point. 
I find that the provisions outlining functions 
tor the NFC do not include the duties of 
censoring films distributed, exhibited, and 
produced locally and internationally. For the 
reason that Nigerian film going audience has 
been weaned on foreign films, and for the 
reason that what the industry should highlight 
Ihe cultural, social and political values 
oi the nation, it is essential that a definite 
policy of censorship be inaugurated. Of 
course, this call has been forcefully put in a 
document: a draft film policy. One or two 
comments, I believe, are in order here. 
In trying to correct the shortfalls of the 1963 
Cinematographic Act, this policy document 
suggests among other things the streamlining 
of the regulations of the Censorship Board 
and its functions into one set of rules for the 
Federation (p. 23), the upgradement of the 
penalty stipulation for infringement of the 
rules, the establishment of zonal branches in 
Lagos, Kano, Port-Harcourt and Yola, and 
that the secretary to the Board should come 
from the NFC. 
The functions which this policy ascribes to 
the Board are quite exhaustive, comprehensive 
and well-meaning, but the suggestion 
that every zonal branch should determine its 
own rules of infringement is a negation of the 
centrality of the Board of Censors in the 
scheme of things. This bogus autonomy might 
even cause problems. Furthermore, I think 
the NFC should fully take charge of the 
Censors Board. For if the functions of the 
NFC are set right and realised in due course, 
it would be in a position to provide the 
necessary data for the judgement that the 
Censorship Board would base its wisdom. 
The idea of the establishment of film societies 
and other voluntary film associations is 
laudable, but the operational bases should 
move into the schools (Primary, Secondary, 
Colleges and Universities) where film clubs 
should be encouraged and public screening 
of significant national films are done at regular 
intervals. The extension of exhibitions 
into the rural areas of the country by means of 
mobile vans should be encouraged. 
The development of the cinema industry in 
West-Africa is therefore a study of the difference 
in the history of colonial practices in the 
subregion as well as the enthusiasm of postcolonial 
governments in the face of paucity 
of resources and/or sheer neglect of this 
cultural means of articulating national differ- 
While French West-Africa, through the help 
of France and other willing international 
bodies, has been able to establish and 
strengthen an important international subregional 
film festival, Fespaco, a cultural 
event which calls attention to films made in 
Africa biennially, no English speaking West- 
African nation has come near the magnitude 
of the organisational zeal of Fespaco. But 
this has little effect on the product of the 
cinema industry in Anglophone West-Africa. 
Many Anglophone films have won prizes 
at international film festivals. KwawAnsah's 
hove Brewed in An African Pot and Ola 
Balogun's Black Goddess are some examples. 
Anglophone films have also won prizes 
at Fespaco meetings. Only recently, the Nigerian 
Film Corporation has tried to promote 
the place of the cinema industry in Nigeria's 
cultural life. The NFC organised its first Film 
Festival from December 9- 12, 1992. Nowhere 
near the grandeur of Fespaco, the first 
Nigerian Film Festival was understandably 
national in outlook. In a significant way, this 
festival has started the industry on the right 
footing. Since this festival, no one is left in 
doubt as to the potentials and enthusiasm of 
the Nigerian audience. GR 
53