IDFA Festival: Israeli Industry Figures Denied Accreditation

The International Documentary Film Festival Amsterdam (IDFA), one of the world’s most prominent documentary film festivals, has declined accreditation to several Israeli industry figures from institutions such as DocAviv Festival, the CoPro market, and public broadcaster Kan. This decision comes as IDFA formally endorses a boycott against Israeli film institutions, a move that has sparked significant debate within the global film community.

The Endorsement of a Boycott

Under the new leadership of Isabel Arrate Fernandez, IDFA has aligned itself with a boycott initiated by “Film Workers for Palestine” last month. This organization published an open pledge to boycott Israeli film institutions deemed “implicated in genocide and apartheid against the Palestinian people.” The pledge garnered support from over 5,000 entertainment industry professionals, including notable figures like Emma Stone and Joaquin Phoenix. Signatories committed to refusing to screen films, attend festivals, or partner with Israeli film institutions perceived as “whitewashing or justifying genocide and apartheid, and/or partnering with the government committing them.” The boycott specifically targets institutions, rather than individual artists.

Consequently, IDFA withheld accreditation from representatives of DocAviv, CoPro, and Kan because these organizations receive a portion of their funding from the Israeli state budget.

Response from Israeli Industry Figures

Michal Weits, the artistic director of DocAviv, a critically acclaimed documentary director and producer, confirmed that she and her counterparts at Kan and CoPro received a refusal letter from IDFA. The letter reportedly cited their alleged complicity in genocide, a claim Weits strongly refutes.

Weits emphasized that DocAviv, despite receiving approximately 25% of its budget from public funds, operates as an independent documentary film festival. She stated that the festival consistently screens films that are critical of the Israeli government and oppose war and occupation, with a mission to foster dialogue and build bridges between Palestinians and Israelis. Weits pointed to past programming, such as the 2019 documentary “Advocate” about an Israeli human-rights lawyer representing Palestinian individuals, and Net Shashani’s “1948: Remember, Remember Not,” which explored events surrounding a Palestinian village in the 1948 Arab-Israeli War, as examples of content that has previously drawn criticism from Israeli government officials for being too critical.

Weits further highlighted that DocAviv has always resisted political pressure, operating independently in its film selection process. She was personally offered accreditation by IDFA but declined it, asserting that the boycott is unfair and sets a problematic precedent. She also noted the severe impact of the boycott on international co-production opportunities, stating that “Everybody is afraid to cooperate with Israel, so it’s become much harder to create co-productions and to work with partners outside of Israel.”

IDFA’s Stance and Precedent

Isabel Arrate Fernandez, in addressing the boycott, explained that for the current year, Israeli organizations receiving government support were not granted accreditation, though this decision will be reviewed for the next year. She clarified that IDFA assesses “independent films and filmmakers individually and on a case-by-case basis,” applying this approach also to institutional requests.

According to Fernandez, if a project demonstrates ties to governments deemed responsible for serious human rights violations—such as through direct state funding—it is generally not selected. This guideline, she noted, has previously led IDFA to refuse certain films from Iran and, since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine, from Russia, among other countries. However, she also mentioned exceptions, including two Israeli films last year that received state funding but were selected due to their critical subject matter. While official government delegations or state-affiliated institutions from such countries are typically not granted accreditation, individual film professionals remain eligible.

Impact on Cultural Exchange and Dialogue

The controversy underscores a growing tension between political activism and cultural exchange within the international film festival circuit. While proponents of the boycott argue for accountability and solidarity with Palestinians, figures like Michal Weits contend that such measures isolate and silence voices that could contribute to understanding and bridge-building. Weits expressed her dream of screening films that depict events in Gaza, the West Bank, Iran, and Lebanon, stating her desire for Israeli audiences to “see people from the other side of the fence,” but acknowledged the difficulty in acquiring such films due to the boycott. She emphasized that “Culture and films are the only way to communicate with each other,” and that the boycott risks isolating voices important for dialogue.