0:01:12 > 0:01:15This is the beginning of a documentary film.
0:01:20 > 0:01:25The common understanding is that a documentary depicts reality,
0:01:25 > 0:01:27unlike fiction, which tells a story.
0:01:31 > 0:01:35This definition may be accepted but it's not precise.
0:01:50 > 0:01:53In the film, I will document a legal system.
0:01:55 > 0:01:58A system which organises law and order
0:01:58 > 0:02:01within the territories we conquered in 1967.
0:02:03 > 0:02:07It's a unique system, only a few people understand it in depth.
0:02:10 > 0:02:13It's also worth reflecting on the term law.
0:02:15 > 0:02:18A common understanding is that the law is a collection of rules
0:02:18 > 0:02:21that organise life in a particular place.
0:02:21 > 0:02:24And define the rights and obligations that exist
0:02:24 > 0:02:28among people and between people and the authorities.
0:02:39 > 0:02:42The law, that organises people's lives,
0:02:42 > 0:02:45is entrusted to certain people.
0:02:45 > 0:02:48People like the protagonists of this film.
0:02:49 > 0:02:52Our protagonists are legal professionals.
0:02:52 > 0:02:56All of them are veterans of the Israeli Military Legal Corps.
0:02:57 > 0:03:02They, and many others, are the people who wrote, developed,
0:03:02 > 0:03:05and implemented the law of the occupied territories.
0:03:16 > 0:03:20A legal professional's work is hidden from sight.
0:03:20 > 0:03:24It's carried out in a language most of us don't even understand.
0:03:26 > 0:03:30The work of our protagonists always remains behind the scenes.
0:03:30 > 0:03:33And never receives the exposure it deserves.
0:03:36 > 0:03:40This work was never filmed but it is documented.
0:03:40 > 0:03:44Hundreds of thousands of pages, military orders,
0:03:44 > 0:03:46legal opinions and court rulings
0:03:46 > 0:03:51tell whoever reads them a story about law in the time of occupation.
0:04:41 > 0:04:45The story actually begins before 1967.
0:04:48 > 0:04:50In the years leading up to the war,
0:04:50 > 0:04:53the Legal Corps had been studying international law,
0:04:53 > 0:04:57focusing on laws of warfare and occupation of enemy territory.
0:05:01 > 0:05:05In those years, the Military Advocate General, Meir Shamgar,
0:05:05 > 0:05:10wrote Guide For A Military Advocate In Occupied Territory.
0:05:10 > 0:05:13A manual containing all the information our military
0:05:13 > 0:05:17legal professionals would need should our army ever occupy
0:05:17 > 0:05:19territory in a neighbouring country.
0:05:37 > 0:05:42Emergency war kit included documents notifying an occupied population
0:05:42 > 0:05:47the basic principles of the new law they would be subjected to.
0:05:47 > 0:05:51All of this according to what is dictated in the Hague Regulations
0:05:51 > 0:05:52and Geneva Convention.
0:07:04 > 0:07:08The law, which is entrusted in the hands of certain people,
0:07:08 > 0:07:10applies to other people.
0:07:10 > 0:07:13Overnight, approximately 1,000,000 people,
0:07:13 > 0:07:15residents of the West Bank and Gaza,
0:07:15 > 0:07:18become subject to the new legal system.
0:07:20 > 0:07:24According to international law, an occupying army is responsible
0:07:24 > 0:07:29for the security and welfare of the residents in areas it occupies.
0:07:29 > 0:07:33The mission was to uphold these responsibilities.
0:07:33 > 0:07:37During the first year, our military legal men formulated
0:07:37 > 0:07:40hundreds of orders in order to meet the changing needs
0:07:40 > 0:07:43of day-to-day life in the territories.
0:07:52 > 0:07:56It was necessary to supervise the content of school books.
0:07:56 > 0:08:00To determine that the Israeli pound is legal currency,
0:08:00 > 0:08:02to set the exchange rates,
0:08:02 > 0:08:05to oversee property of the occupied state,
0:08:05 > 0:08:08to protect archaeological sites,
0:08:08 > 0:08:12to enable freedom of worship for all religions.
0:08:38 > 0:08:40The local residents learned the law,
0:08:40 > 0:08:43not through reading the orders issued,
0:08:43 > 0:08:45but through contact with the new authorities.
0:08:47 > 0:08:51Over the course of half a century, they were subject to Ottoman rule,
0:08:51 > 0:08:55then British, then Jordanian or Egyptian.
0:08:55 > 0:08:59Now they find themselves governed by the Israeli military.
0:10:48 > 0:10:52The people subjected to the law will be represented in this
0:10:52 > 0:10:55film by images from documentaries made over the last 40 years.
0:10:56 > 0:11:00Mostly by Israeli filmmakers, like me.
0:11:39 > 0:11:41In films like these,
0:11:41 > 0:11:45the person who is documenting presents facts and context.
0:11:46 > 0:11:48The subject is filmed as himself
0:11:48 > 0:11:53and the viewer judges reality as it is presented before him.
0:12:00 > 0:12:02The first order to be published,
0:12:02 > 0:12:06based on British emergency regulations of 1945,
0:12:06 > 0:12:08establishes military courts
0:12:08 > 0:12:12in which people who violate order and security will be tried.
0:12:14 > 0:12:17The order states that the judges in such courts should be
0:12:17 > 0:12:19three military officers
0:12:19 > 0:12:22and that at least one of them must have legal training.
0:12:24 > 0:12:27"The prosecutor", states the order,
0:12:27 > 0:12:30"will be an officer appointed by the regional commander.
0:12:30 > 0:12:35"The defendant may be represented by an attorney of his choice.
0:12:36 > 0:12:38"The trial will take place in Hebrew
0:12:38 > 0:12:42"but a soldier who can translate the proceedings into Arabic
0:12:42 > 0:12:46"must be present and the proceedings will be transcribed."
0:12:52 > 0:12:55Today, hundreds of thousands of court minutes
0:12:55 > 0:12:58are preserved in our military archives.
0:12:58 > 0:13:02The indictments, arguments and judgements
0:13:02 > 0:13:05tell the history of the relationship between the
0:13:05 > 0:13:09Palestinians in the territories and the law they are subjected to.
0:14:30 > 0:14:33The Israeli soldiers who testified in the trial said
0:14:33 > 0:14:37they were flown in by helicopter to pursue a group of people who
0:14:37 > 0:14:40entered the occupied area from Jordan illegally.
0:14:42 > 0:14:46The infiltrators were armed and a fire-fight broke out.
0:14:46 > 0:14:50Eight of the infiltrators surrendered and were captured.
0:14:53 > 0:14:57As the trial began, the group's commander spoke to the court.
0:14:59 > 0:15:01"I was born in Jerusalem,"
0:15:01 > 0:15:04he said, "and left the country after the war.
0:15:06 > 0:15:09"I am certain that this land is my land."
0:15:14 > 0:15:16The documents in the file reveal
0:15:16 > 0:15:19that Omar Qassem left the West Bank
0:15:19 > 0:15:23in 1967 during a period when many Palestinians left the area,
0:15:23 > 0:15:25uncertain of what might come.
0:15:26 > 0:15:30In Jordan, he joined one of the Palestinian organisations,
0:15:30 > 0:15:32went through military training
0:15:32 > 0:15:35and was sent back into the occupied area in order to attack
0:15:35 > 0:15:39Israeli targets and help spark an armed uprising in the region.
0:15:42 > 0:15:47In court, Qassem claims that he is a soldier who fought against soldiers.
0:15:47 > 0:15:50He is not willing to stand trial as a criminal.
0:16:35 > 0:16:38Today, the distinction between a soldier and a terrorist
0:16:38 > 0:16:41is deeply rooted in our legal and political discourse.
0:16:41 > 0:16:44But apparently at the end of the 1960s,
0:16:44 > 0:16:49it was still necessary to establish this difference in the law.
0:16:49 > 0:16:52The Qassem judgement is one of the first legal texts
0:16:52 > 0:16:55that contends with the legitimacy of the
0:16:55 > 0:16:57Palestinian struggle against the state of Israel.
0:16:59 > 0:17:04In his ruling, Judge Abulafia writes that the Geneva Convention
0:17:04 > 0:17:07indeed grants special status to lawful combatants,
0:17:07 > 0:17:10including members of liberation organisations.
0:17:12 > 0:17:16"To be granted such status," explains the judge,
0:17:16 > 0:17:19"these combatants must meet certain requirements.
0:17:19 > 0:17:21"Most importantly,
0:17:21 > 0:17:24"they must fight according to the international laws of warfare.
0:17:29 > 0:17:32"The Popular Front For The Liberation Of Palestine,"
0:17:32 > 0:17:34writes the judge,
0:17:34 > 0:17:38"is not an organisation that upholds laws of warfare.
0:17:38 > 0:17:42"Their attacks on innocent civilians in the Jerusalem market
0:17:42 > 0:17:45"or in the bus station in Tel Aviv are clear proof of this.
0:17:48 > 0:17:51"Members of such an organisation have no right to claim
0:17:51 > 0:17:53"the status of lawful combatants.
0:17:55 > 0:17:57"International law was not written
0:17:57 > 0:18:00"in order to protect terrorists and criminals."
0:19:57 > 0:20:01According to what she said during her interrogation,
0:20:01 > 0:20:05Arifa met a woman in the marketplace who told her that a certain
0:20:05 > 0:20:09man asked that she meet him in the vineyards outside the village
0:20:09 > 0:20:11the next day.
0:20:13 > 0:20:17Arifa understood that this man had come from Jordan illegally
0:20:17 > 0:20:20and that he was hiding from the authorities.
0:20:20 > 0:20:24She also figured he might be hungry and thirsty.
0:20:25 > 0:20:28When she went to the meeting, Arifa brought bread
0:20:28 > 0:20:31and a couple of tins of sardines with her.
0:20:32 > 0:20:34Over the next two weeks she continued to bring food
0:20:34 > 0:20:39and water for the man and for three others who were hiding with him.
0:20:40 > 0:20:44Months later she was arrested for this and brought to trial.
0:21:31 > 0:21:34Arifa Ibrahim's attorney claims her client shouldn't be
0:21:34 > 0:21:38punished at all for feeding a person who asked for help.
0:21:38 > 0:21:41Even if the man is wanted by the authorities.
0:21:45 > 0:21:48"Giving food to a person in need," claims the attorney,
0:21:48 > 0:21:50"is a universally accepted human value."
0:21:55 > 0:21:59Justice Jacob Auer does not accept the defence's arguments.
0:21:59 > 0:22:02In his ruling, he writes that
0:22:02 > 0:22:06"these infiltrating terrorists are like poisonous snakes.
0:22:06 > 0:22:09"The so-called human values mentioned by the defence attorney
0:22:09 > 0:22:11"do not apply to them."
0:22:12 > 0:22:16The judge maintains that apparently punishing the infiltrators
0:22:16 > 0:22:19themselves is not sufficient.
0:22:19 > 0:22:22"We have to make the residents understand that infiltrators
0:22:22 > 0:22:24"must not be aided.
0:22:27 > 0:22:31"The only way to achieve this result," says the judge, "is to
0:22:31 > 0:22:36"make the local population feel that aiding these people is dangerous."
0:22:37 > 0:22:41He therefore decides to sentence the defendant before him
0:22:41 > 0:22:43to a year-and-a-half in prison.
0:23:34 > 0:23:38Justice demands that I, the person documenting the case,
0:23:38 > 0:23:40interview the defendant, Arifa Ibrahim.
0:23:42 > 0:23:45What does she remember from her trial in 1976?
0:23:47 > 0:23:49Why didn't she say anything throughout the proceedings?
0:23:55 > 0:23:59The minutes state you were a widow, who did your children stay with?
0:24:01 > 0:24:04If you had realised there was a risk,
0:24:04 > 0:24:06why did you keep on bringing him food?
0:24:08 > 0:24:11Did your punishment actually deter others from having contact
0:24:11 > 0:24:13with members of the resistance?
0:24:18 > 0:24:23It turns out that Arifa Ibrahim still lives in the village of Beit Fajjar.
0:24:25 > 0:24:27Justice demands that I interview her
0:24:27 > 0:24:30rather than make do with quotes from her trial
0:24:30 > 0:24:34and images of unknown Palestinian women filmed at the same period.
0:24:36 > 0:24:39But I do not intend to interview her.
0:24:39 > 0:24:43Because this film is not about the people who broke the law.
0:24:43 > 0:24:47It's about the people who were charged with upholding it.
0:26:45 > 0:26:46HE COUGHS
0:29:38 > 0:29:40The image of Palestinians
0:29:40 > 0:29:43gathered at the entrance of the Israeli Supreme Court
0:29:43 > 0:29:46is one of the key images of the subject I'm documenting.
0:29:52 > 0:29:56The Israeli Supreme Court was the first court in history
0:29:56 > 0:29:59to contend with a unique challenge.
0:29:59 > 0:30:03Doing justice not only for Israeli citizens
0:30:03 > 0:30:07but for people that the state is holding under military occupation.
0:31:24 > 0:31:27A decade into the occupation,
0:31:27 > 0:31:30one of the main issues that the Supreme Court had to address
0:31:30 > 0:31:33was Israelis settling in the occupied territories.
0:31:35 > 0:31:40In the late 1960s, Israeli citizens began moving to the territories,
0:31:40 > 0:31:44claiming that settling these areas is a biblical right.
0:31:44 > 0:31:46From a different perspective,
0:31:46 > 0:31:50it was argued that Article 49 of the Geneva Convention prohibits
0:31:50 > 0:31:55an occupying power from transferring its citizens into the occupied area.
0:32:18 > 0:32:22Palestinian opposition to the settlements led to demonstrations
0:32:22 > 0:32:26and confrontations between the local residents and the army.
0:32:28 > 0:32:32The resistance escalated as some of the settlements were built
0:32:32 > 0:32:36on land seized from Palestinian residents by the military.
0:32:36 > 0:32:40Land owners received military orders saying that the army
0:32:40 > 0:32:44needs their land temporarily for security purposes.
0:32:44 > 0:32:47Thus they must vacate the property and receive compensation.
0:33:43 > 0:33:45While bulldozers prepare the land,
0:33:45 > 0:33:48Adhil Dweikat from the village of Rujeib
0:33:48 > 0:33:51petitions the Supreme Court of Israel.
0:33:51 > 0:33:53He argues that the seizure of his land,
0:33:53 > 0:33:56and that of 11 other residents, is illegal.
0:34:00 > 0:34:02Dweikat says to the court,
0:34:02 > 0:34:06"There is no real security need behind the seizure of this land.
0:34:06 > 0:34:10"The land is being seized for civil rather than military needs
0:34:10 > 0:34:14"and this is a blatant violation of international law."
0:34:32 > 0:34:37The Supreme Court ruling came months after the land was seized.
0:34:37 > 0:34:41The Elon Moreh settlement was already a fact on the ground.
0:34:43 > 0:34:45In their decision,
0:34:45 > 0:34:48the Supreme Court justices wrote that, "International law indeed
0:34:48 > 0:34:53"permits the seizure of personal property for security reasons.
0:34:53 > 0:34:55"However," they added,
0:34:55 > 0:35:00"they feel that security was not the main reason for this seizure.
0:35:00 > 0:35:04"There was another perhaps more important motivation here -
0:35:04 > 0:35:07"building a civilian settlement.
0:35:07 > 0:35:09"And according to international law,"
0:35:09 > 0:35:13write the judges, "such a motivation cannot justify
0:35:13 > 0:35:18"seizure of a resident's private property in occupied territory."
0:35:18 > 0:35:21The court instructs the regional commander to evacuate the new
0:35:21 > 0:35:25settlement and return the land to its Palestinian owners.
0:36:40 > 0:36:44As the legal adviser to the commander of the occupied area,
0:36:44 > 0:36:48Ramati knew the local land laws dating back to the Jordanian
0:36:48 > 0:36:51kingdom and even the Ottoman Empire.
0:36:53 > 0:36:57He told Sharon that in the 19th century Ottoman land law
0:36:57 > 0:37:00there's a special term - Mawat Land.
0:37:00 > 0:37:03Dead land.
0:37:03 > 0:37:07This type of land must be far enough from the nearest village
0:37:07 > 0:37:10so that one can no longer hear the crow of a rooster
0:37:10 > 0:37:13standing at the edge of that village.
0:37:17 > 0:37:19According to that old Ottoman law,
0:37:19 > 0:37:23such land may belong to a resident only temporarily,
0:37:23 > 0:37:25as long as he cultivates it.
0:37:26 > 0:37:30But if the resident fails to cultivate the land for three
0:37:30 > 0:37:34consecutive years, the dead land reverts to the empire.
0:37:34 > 0:37:37And legally speaking, Ramati explains,
0:37:37 > 0:37:41the regional military commander is the successor of that empire.
0:38:30 > 0:38:32LOUD EXPLOSION
0:39:03 > 0:39:07While the construction of new settlements is booming,
0:39:07 > 0:39:10another petition is submitted to the Supreme Court.
0:39:13 > 0:39:17This time it comes from the villagers of Tarqumia, near Hebron.
0:39:18 > 0:39:22Hundreds of acres near their village are declared by the
0:39:22 > 0:39:24regional commander to be state land.
0:39:26 > 0:39:29The villagers argue before the Supreme Court that even if
0:39:29 > 0:39:32certain land could have been considered state land
0:39:32 > 0:39:36back in the Jordanian and Ottoman times, international law
0:39:36 > 0:39:41still prohibits an occupying power from using this land as it pleases.
0:39:42 > 0:39:46The presiding justice was Meir Shamgar -
0:39:46 > 0:39:48former Military Advocate General who had been
0:39:48 > 0:39:52appointed in 1975 to the Israeli Supreme Court.
0:40:27 > 0:40:28In the Al-Nazal case,
0:40:28 > 0:40:32Justice Shamgar had to determine what we can or cannot do with
0:40:32 > 0:40:36land that is legally considered property of the occupied state.
0:40:38 > 0:40:43Shamgar explains that, according to the Hague Treaty,
0:40:43 > 0:40:47an occupying army is only a guardian of the occupied state's property.
0:40:47 > 0:40:50"The army may not transfer ownership of the property.
0:40:50 > 0:40:54"It must safeguard it and return it to the occupied state
0:40:54 > 0:40:56"when the occupation ends."
0:41:07 > 0:41:09"But despite these prohibitions,"
0:41:09 > 0:41:13Shamgar adds, "the Hague Treaty also recognises the right of an
0:41:13 > 0:41:18"occupying power to make temporary use of the occupied state's property.
0:41:20 > 0:41:23"Under this definition," explains Shamgar,
0:41:23 > 0:41:27"the occupied property may be rented, leased or cultivated.
0:41:27 > 0:41:31"And therefore, the actions of the military concerning
0:41:31 > 0:41:35"occupied state property are compatible with international law."
0:41:40 > 0:41:42HELICOPTER ROTOR WHIRS
0:41:48 > 0:41:52Today, around a half million Israeli citizens
0:41:52 > 0:41:55live in the territories conquered in 1967.
0:41:55 > 0:41:59Most of them live in settlements built on hundreds of thousands
0:41:59 > 0:42:04of acres declared by the military commander to be state land.
0:44:25 > 0:44:29Justice Shamgar doesn't see the connection between the Supreme Court
0:44:29 > 0:44:32rulings and our settlements in the occupied territories.
0:44:38 > 0:44:43But I, the person documenting the issue, see a connection
0:44:43 > 0:44:47and I present the rulings and the events as I understand them.
0:44:50 > 0:44:54In the film, I rule on what reality is.
0:44:58 > 0:45:01The Palestinian residents, on the other hand,
0:45:01 > 0:45:04say that they don't see the connection between the Ottoman law
0:45:04 > 0:45:07and the establishment of hundreds of new settlements.
0:45:10 > 0:45:13The connection was made by legal professionals,
0:45:13 > 0:45:15adopted by the government,
0:45:15 > 0:45:20upheld by Supreme Court rulings and thus it became law.
0:45:44 > 0:45:48CROWD CHANTING AND CLAPPING
0:46:07 > 0:46:09DEVICE EXPLODING
0:46:09 > 0:46:11SCREAMING AND GUNFIRE
0:46:17 > 0:46:19GUNFIRE
0:46:23 > 0:46:28In December 1987 the widespread popular uprising breaks out
0:46:28 > 0:46:30in the occupied territories.
0:46:35 > 0:46:38As the temporary occupation enters its 21st year,
0:46:38 > 0:46:42Palestinian frustration erupts into mass demonstrations
0:46:42 > 0:46:46and actions against the army and Israeli settlers.
0:46:48 > 0:46:50GUN FIRING
0:46:52 > 0:46:55The population pays a high price for the uprising
0:46:55 > 0:46:58but the occupation comes to the attention
0:46:58 > 0:47:00of the international community.
0:47:00 > 0:47:02The whole world watches as Israel,
0:47:02 > 0:47:05known as the only democracy in the Middle East,
0:47:05 > 0:47:08contends with the civilian uprising.
0:47:24 > 0:47:29Israel chooses not to give in and retreat from the West Bank, in Gaza,
0:47:29 > 0:47:33but, at the same time, not to use its full military force
0:47:33 > 0:47:35against the rebellious population.
0:47:37 > 0:47:43The goal is to try to make the population obey the law once more.
0:47:51 > 0:47:55In the shadow of the familiar images from the intifada period
0:47:55 > 0:47:59is the work of a new generation of military legal professionals.
0:47:59 > 0:48:03Most of them were not part of the creation of this system
0:48:03 > 0:48:06but now they must adapt it to the new reality.
0:48:07 > 0:48:12They are the ones who must enforce the law with the local population
0:48:12 > 0:48:15but, at the same time, deliver justice.
0:48:27 > 0:48:29SPEAKS IN HEBREW
0:48:29 > 0:48:34I realise that I am sent to the West Bank by this great flag.
0:48:34 > 0:48:37To the people who sit here, opposite it,
0:48:37 > 0:48:41if you witness the flag of the enemy and I represent that flag,
0:48:41 > 0:48:44but, on the other hand, the other symbol,
0:48:44 > 0:48:49which is even higher than the flag, are the scales of justice,
0:48:49 > 0:48:52and I always say that I would like to be able,
0:48:52 > 0:48:55and I hope I can always love my country, as represented by the flag,
0:48:55 > 0:48:58and still love justice, and still uphold justice.
0:52:16 > 0:52:17MAN SHOUTING
0:52:22 > 0:52:25One of our main means of suppressing the intifada
0:52:25 > 0:52:28was imprisoning as many activists as possible.
0:52:34 > 0:52:38Over the four-year uprising more than 50,000 people were arrested.
0:52:39 > 0:52:42Some of them were arrested a number of times.
0:52:45 > 0:52:50Most detainees were charged with felonies and brought to trial.
0:52:50 > 0:52:55But according to the British emergency regulations of 1945,
0:52:55 > 0:52:59a person can also be incarcerated without being charged.
0:53:00 > 0:53:03This kind of administrative arrest is put into effect,
0:53:03 > 0:53:08with an order issued by the army, against a particular resident.
0:53:08 > 0:53:12The order states that this person constitutes a threat to security
0:53:12 > 0:53:16and therefore must be incarcerated for a number of months.
0:53:19 > 0:53:22To prevent arbitrary use of these means,
0:53:22 > 0:53:25the law stipulated that administrative detainees
0:53:25 > 0:53:30must be brought before a judge within 96 hours of their arrest,
0:53:30 > 0:53:34in order to examine the necessity of their detention.
0:55:55 > 0:55:57Removing the requirement
0:55:57 > 0:56:00that every single case of administrative detention be reviewed
0:56:00 > 0:56:03made processing these arrests much easier.
0:56:05 > 0:56:10Many detainees didn't see the point of appealing and, under new rules,
0:56:10 > 0:56:13the army was not required to hold a hearing about their case.
0:56:17 > 0:56:20A detainee who demanded to see a judge was brought,
0:56:20 > 0:56:23within a number of weeks or months,
0:56:23 > 0:56:26before a military officer with legal training.
1:00:56 > 1:01:00The interview I conducted with Mr Pesensson
1:01:00 > 1:01:02lasted around three hours.
1:01:02 > 1:01:04He told me many more things.
1:01:04 > 1:01:08For example, that he volunteered to hear these appeals
1:01:08 > 1:01:10because, at the time of the intifada,
1:01:10 > 1:01:15there were few military legal officers who agreed to do it.
1:01:15 > 1:01:18He also told me that he was known as the last judge
1:01:18 > 1:01:20to leave the holding camp at night,
1:01:20 > 1:01:23since he insisted on reading all of his cases carefully.
1:01:26 > 1:01:29One could say, in Pesensson's own words,
1:01:29 > 1:01:33that the viewer is only hearing a paraphrase of my interview with him,
1:01:33 > 1:01:38since it is I who decides what part of the conversation to show
1:01:38 > 1:01:40and what to leave out.
1:01:41 > 1:01:43The viewer can't ask Pesensson
1:01:43 > 1:01:45what he thinks about how I edited the interview.
1:01:47 > 1:01:50The viewer's free to judge persons and words
1:01:50 > 1:01:53but all the information comes from me.
1:04:31 > 1:04:33HAMMERING ON DOOR
1:04:33 > 1:04:35MAN SHOUTING
1:04:55 > 1:04:58The measures we used to suppress the uprising
1:04:58 > 1:05:00were challenged in the Supreme Court.
1:05:04 > 1:05:06Hundreds of petitions filed in those years
1:05:06 > 1:05:09and thousands of others that were discussed since then
1:05:09 > 1:05:13bring up more than just specific legal questions.
1:05:13 > 1:05:15They demonstrate how the Supreme Court,
1:05:15 > 1:05:19a staunch defender of individual rights inside Israel,
1:05:19 > 1:05:23met with the challenge of defending the rights of Palestinian residents
1:05:23 > 1:05:26while faced with demands to permit actions the army defined,
1:05:26 > 1:05:28"security imperatives".
1:05:35 > 1:05:38Again and again the Supreme Court discussed the punitive demolition
1:05:38 > 1:05:41of family homes, in which residents,
1:05:41 > 1:05:45suspected of harming Israelis or collaborators, resided.
1:05:49 > 1:05:53The court heard numerous petitions against deportations
1:05:53 > 1:05:55of suspected leaders of the uprising.
1:06:13 > 1:06:17Since the 1990s, the judges had to rule on the severe restrictions
1:06:17 > 1:06:20over freedom of movement imposed on the residents
1:06:20 > 1:06:22and to contend with the difference
1:06:22 > 1:06:25between the rights of Israeli settlers,
1:06:25 > 1:06:27and those of Palestinian residents.
1:06:31 > 1:06:33In the last decade,
1:06:33 > 1:06:37the Supreme Court was asked to stop the practice of targeted killings -
1:06:37 > 1:06:39execution, without trial,
1:06:39 > 1:06:42of residents who took part in military activity,
1:06:42 > 1:06:44who were responsible for it.
1:06:47 > 1:06:49Time and again the judges, in fact,
1:06:49 > 1:06:53restrained the army's actions against the occupied population.
1:06:56 > 1:07:00But the court almost never ruled that an action presented by the army
1:07:00 > 1:07:03as a "security imperative" was illegal.
1:09:34 > 1:09:36HE LAUGHS
1:10:16 > 1:10:20Justice Shamgar is familiar with the text I'm reading to him.
1:10:20 > 1:10:23It is one of the harshest, most compelling critiques
1:10:23 > 1:10:27written about Israel's rule of law to which Shamgar devoted his life.
1:10:29 > 1:10:32After reviewing hundreds of petitions,
1:10:32 > 1:10:35the writer finds that the court's intervention did, in fact,
1:10:35 > 1:10:39have a restraining effect on the prolonged occupation,
1:10:39 > 1:10:44but he dares ask, "Could it be that the very restraining effect,
1:10:44 > 1:10:46"as well as the whole balance and check system
1:10:46 > 1:10:50"created around the occupation, actually make it more sustainable?"
1:10:53 > 1:10:55"Is it possible," he asks,
1:10:55 > 1:10:58"that a non-regulated system would have served to delegitimise
1:10:58 > 1:11:02"the occupation in the eyes of Israeli society
1:11:02 > 1:11:04"and encourage us to end it?"
1:12:39 > 1:12:43In September 1999 the Supreme Court of Israel
1:12:43 > 1:12:45made one of the rare rulings
1:12:45 > 1:12:49in which it went beyond simply restraining the occupation
1:12:49 > 1:12:51and nearly abolished one of the practices
1:12:51 > 1:12:53used by the security forces.
1:12:57 > 1:13:01The court rejected the General Security Service's position,
1:13:01 > 1:13:04it ruled that, except in extreme cases,
1:13:04 > 1:13:08the use of torture during interrogation is a felony in Israel.
1:13:19 > 1:13:23The ruling was given at the end of a decade during which Palestinians,
1:13:23 > 1:13:25residents of the occupied territories,
1:13:25 > 1:13:30carried out mass suicide attempts in the heart of the State of Israel.
1:13:31 > 1:13:35Many voices in the Israeli public blamed the Supreme Court
1:13:35 > 1:13:40for setting Palestinians' human rights above our own security.
1:13:40 > 1:13:41Public.
1:13:44 > 1:13:46CROWD CHANTING
1:14:01 > 1:14:04But the process that led to this powerful decision
1:14:04 > 1:14:07began 12 years earlier in the 1980s,
1:14:07 > 1:14:11long before the large-scale suicide attacks
1:14:11 > 1:14:13and even before the uprising.
1:14:20 > 1:14:24In 1987, a governmental commission was appointed
1:14:24 > 1:14:29to investigate the genuine security service interrogation methods.
1:14:33 > 1:14:36The commission determined that, in fact,
1:14:36 > 1:14:39since the early years of the occupation, the service had been
1:14:39 > 1:14:43using various forms of torture during its interrogations.
1:14:45 > 1:14:47The commission also revealed that,
1:14:47 > 1:14:50when defendants claimed they were tortured,
1:14:50 > 1:14:52it was standard procedure for interrogators
1:14:52 > 1:14:56to testify in court and deny the use of force.
1:15:01 > 1:15:05The commission emphasised that the judges who had heard
1:15:05 > 1:15:09the false testimonies were not aware of this whole system.
1:23:16 > 1:23:18Mr Pesensson says that certain people
1:23:18 > 1:23:21should interrogate other people
1:23:21 > 1:23:24so that I can go to a movie in the evening
1:23:24 > 1:23:27or sit across from him and interview him.
1:23:33 > 1:23:36He reminds me that in the situation we've reached,
1:23:36 > 1:23:41my personal security depends on the violation of the security of others
1:23:41 > 1:23:45and that my freedom is at the expense of the freedom of others.
1:23:47 > 1:23:52Both making this film and viewing it take place under the auspices
1:23:52 > 1:23:55of people who take care of our security and freedom.
1:23:59 > 1:24:03Pesensson reminds me that the law I'm documenting might apply
1:24:03 > 1:24:07only to other people but is written for me.
1:26:01 > 1:26:04WHIZZING TAPE
1:26:12 > 1:26:15From case number 2058, in 2011...
1:26:17 > 1:26:21..the military prosecutor versus Basim Tamimi.
1:26:22 > 1:26:25The defendant addresses the court...
1:26:27 > 1:26:31"Your honour, I was born in the same year as the occupation
1:26:31 > 1:26:35"and ever since I've been living under its inherent inhumanity,
1:26:35 > 1:26:40"inequality, racism and lack of freedom...
1:26:45 > 1:26:48"..I've been incarcerated nine times in my life, amounting to almost
1:26:48 > 1:26:53"three years in prison, though I was never convicted of any felony.
1:26:56 > 1:27:00"During one of my detentions I was paralysed as the result of torture.
1:27:00 > 1:27:04"My wife has also been detained, my children wounded,
1:27:04 > 1:27:06"my land stolen by settlers
1:27:06 > 1:27:09"and now my house is slated for demolition.
1:27:15 > 1:27:19"International law recognises that occupied people
1:27:19 > 1:27:21"have the right to resist.
1:27:21 > 1:27:26"Following my belief in this right, I organise popular demonstrations
1:27:26 > 1:27:30"against the theft of more than half of the land of my village.
1:27:30 > 1:27:33"Against the settler attacks, against the occupation.
1:27:37 > 1:27:40"You, who claim to be the only democracy in the Middle East,
1:27:40 > 1:27:44"are trying me under laws written by authorities I've not elected,
1:27:44 > 1:27:48"authorities which do not represent me in any way.
1:27:48 > 1:27:52"For me, these laws do not exist. They are meaningless.
1:27:54 > 1:27:58"The military prosecutor accuses me of inciting protestors
1:27:58 > 1:28:01"to throw stones at soldiers.
1:28:01 > 1:28:05"What actually incited them was the occupation's bulldozers on our land,
1:28:05 > 1:28:08"the sound of guns and the smell of tear gas.
1:28:12 > 1:28:15"And if the military judge decides to release me,
1:28:15 > 1:28:21"will I be convinced that there is justice in your courts?"
1:28:23 > 1:28:26Basim Tamimi, from the village of Nabi Saleh,
1:28:26 > 1:28:28is standing trial in the military court
1:28:28 > 1:28:31at the same time that work on this film is being concluded.
1:28:34 > 1:28:37I will probably move on to document another subject.
1:28:39 > 1:28:42The audience has finished watching the reality that has been
1:28:42 > 1:28:46presented before them and can now go back to everyday reality.
1:28:48 > 1:28:52Basim Tamimi waits under arrest for his judgement.
1:29:18 > 1:29:21Subtitles by Red Bee Media Ltd