Exposing the state: How other democracies handled films like Satluj

As Diljit Dosanjh’s Satluj faces a ban, a look at how five global democracies handled controversial films that exposed their own state machinery

When a filmmaker shines a light on the darkest, most uncomfortable chapters of a nation’s history, governments face a definitive choice: do they suppress the narrative to preserve a fragile peace, or do they trust their citizens to process the truth?

While the sudden digital takedown of Diljit Dosanjh’s film Satluj highlights a preference for containment, global history shows that mature democracies consistently choose open dialogue over censorship. Here is how five nations, from different parts of the world, handled films that laid bare the brutal excesses of their own state machinery.

In all of these cases, the governments trusted their citizens to process difficult historical truths. By treating adults as mature audiences rather than shielding them from controversy, these nations found that open discussion ultimately strengthens public trust far more than a sudden digital takedown ever could.

1. South Korea: A Taxi Driver (2017)

This film uncovers the Gwangju Uprising of 1980, a painful historical event where South Korea’s military dictatorship enforced a strict media blackout and turned its weapons on its own citizens, killing hundreds of student protestors and civilians.

The Reaction: Instead of blocking the film out of fear that it would damage the military’s reputation or spark fresh public unrest, the South Korean government completely embraced it. The sitting President at the time, Moon Jae-in, even attended a highly publicized theater screening alongside the creators.

The Outcome: The film became a massive box office hit and represented South Korea at the Oscars. More importantly, the immense public conversation it generated prompted the government to launch a fresh, official independent investigation to uncover the full extent of the historical cover-up.