The Sundance Film Festival begins later this week in Utah. How exciting to get the announcement that the film fest has picked up Praxis Films’ The Law in These Parts.
THE LAW IN THESE PARTS explores the four-decade-old Israeli military legal system in the Occupied Territories. Since Israel conquered the territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the 1967 War, the military has imposed thousand of orders and laws, established military courts, sentenced hundreds of thousand of Palestinians, enabled half a million Israeli “settlers” to move to the Occupied Territories and developed a system of long-term jurisdiction by an occupying army that is unique in the world.
THE LAW IN THESE PARTS explores this unprededented and little-known story through testimonies of the military legal professionals who were the archtects of the system and helped run it in its formative years.
Directed by Ra’anan Alexandrovicz. Laura Poitras producer. Sundance’s synopsis:
“This film is not about the people who broke the law, but about those entrusted with the law,” says director Ra’anan Alexandrowicz about his latest project. Ambitiously perceived, sparely designed, and meticulously executed, The Law in These Parts is commanding and compassionate as it goes to the heart of Israel’s moral quandary. In this country founded on democratic principles, Alexandrowicz asks—in both simple and profound terms—can justice truly be served in the occupied territories given the current system of law administered by Israel for Palestinians?
(Hat tip Matthew Graber @WPEB881RAA )
Actually, if you ask the Tibetans, the occupation of their homeland and the exile of many of their people began earlier than the Israeli occupation, which began in 1967. Also, parts of the Israeli occupation have in the meanwhile been ended; not so for the Tibetans.
Some Kashmiris would make a similar claim. The West Saharans and some of the Cypriots will tell you their occupation hasn’t been much shorter.
Hi Annie, isn’t it a bit early on the West Coast?
Your details look interesting. But I have to figure out why some videos don’t work on my Firefox. Anything special about this one?
Alexandrowicz is an interesting case of an Israeli director — his earlier doc “The Inner Tour” is a stand-out work, one that goes to the heart of the right of return. However when I asked him once if he considered the film anti-Zionist he was very conflicted with the label. When the film screened at MOMA he similarly distanced himself from the label during the Q&A. I saw him as a kind of leftist Israeli artist I occasionally run into — able to express a critique of Zionism almost unconsciously through his creative work, but very uneasy with socially and publicly embracing the critique he had just enacted or articulating it through available political frameworks of “anti-Zionism” or otherwise. His next film, James’ Journey to Jerusalem, is a nice liberal film against racism directed towards African migrants in Israel — nothing to complain of, but plainly and safely in the realm of acceptable critique, a film that is cozy with Zionism. As I recall, it doesn’t even reference Palestine/Palestinians. I was disappointed seeing it, I felt he was moving away from edge into the soft center of Israeli public discourse. But I’ve held out hope and this film seems more promising… I look forward to seeing it.
Thanks for that recommendation Annie.
I assume you recommend the film.
“I asked him once if he considered the film anti-Zionist, he was very conflicted with the label. ”
Why do people always try to put a label on anybody??
Why do they try to squeeze other people in some kind of drawers, so then they can take them out of those drawers, and use whenever needed??
Anti-zionist, liberal anti-zionist , conservative anti zionist, progressive anti-zionist, leftist anti-zionist, secular anti-zionist, ultra anti-zionist, hyper-anti-zionist, hypo-anti-zionist, almost anti zionist ,”wanna be” anti- zionist,” gonna be ” anti-zionist, anti-zionist with affinity to zionism, anti-zionist in making, anti-zionist in breaking, anti-zionist in zionist’s clothes, …………..
Maybe he just tries to be objective, honest, ABOVE all the labels??
Maybe he just wants to present the movie , for the audience to see, to learn, to discuss, to judge.
As long as he has done the docummentary honestly, trying to be as objective, fair and square as possible, then let’s appreciate the effort , without trying to put a label on his back.