Calls grow for exoneration of ‘Indonesia refusers’ amidst apology for Dutch colonial violence

Nevin Al Sukari - Sana'a - The Indonesia-refusers were a group of Dutch conscripts and soldiers who refused to participate in the military campaign to suppress Indonesia's fight for independence after World War II. — AFP pic

AMSTERDAM, Oct 14 — Families of 20 men imprisoned for refusing to serve in the Dutch military during the struggle for Indonesian independence have formally requested that their relatives be exonerated.

According to The Guardian, they said that these men should be recognised not as “deserters, traitors, and cowards,” but as individuals who stood on the right side of history.

An official investigation into the violent military campaign waged by the Netherlands in Indonesia after World War II revealed that it systematically employed “excessive violence,” resulting in the massacre of countless innocent villagers. The families of those victims ultimately received compensation for their suffering.

In 2022, former Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte issued an apology, stating that if conscientious objectors were aware of the extreme violence they were resisting, their reputations could be rehabilitated.

Now, the families of the so-called Indonesië-weigeraars (“Indonesia-refusers”) are urging the current right-wing government to clear the names of their fathers.

Nel Bak, 68, from Middenbeemster, highlighted the ongoing stigma to The Guardian.

“We want the verdicts cancelled because our fathers are still registered as deserters, traitors, and cowards,” she was quoted as saying.

Bak, along with her 95-year-old mother, is seeking a pardon for her father, Jan de Wit, who served three years in prison alongside Dutch fascists.

“My father, coming from a communist background, respected the call for Indonesian independence. He believed we had no business there,” she said.

The Dutch government conscripted around 120,000 men to suppress the Indonesian Republic, which declared its independence on August 17, 1945, at any cost.

The investigation concluded that the Netherlands waged a “hopeless war” that devolved into systemic violence. It stated that “extreme violence” was frequently and systematically used, with close oversight from the Dutch government.

Eelco van der Waals, 68, from The Hague, received an apology for the “harsh” imprisonment of his pacifist father, Koos van der Waals, from former defence minister Kajsa Ollongren in June.

He said that true rehabilitation is essential for historical clarity.

“After the Japanese were defeated in East Asia, the Americans and British took control, but Dutch companies could not accept losing their interests. The Dutch government chose the wrong side. That’s why it’s crucial to focus on rehabilitation, not just apologies,” he said.

Peter Hartog, 70, from Rotterdam, echoed these sentiments regarding his father, Rienus Hartog, who realised he could not carry out orders to harm a straw man during training.

“My father always stood up for his choices, and he deserves his place in history,” Hartog said.

Jurjen Pen, a lawyer advocating for the conscientious objectors, argued that it is unjust to demand that families prove their relatives were aware of the violence, especially given the limited communication at the time and decades of official denial.

“All sentences should be annulled. They did this in Germany for those who refused to fight for the Nazis,” he remarked.

Pen explained that Dutch law provides for three forms of rehabilitation: an apology for mistreatment, restoration of good name, and a complete pardon that nullifies the verdict.

He contended that a full pardon is the most fitting remedy for the Indonesië-weigeraars.

“The Netherlands has much to be ashamed of in hindsight, which is why amnesty has not been granted. It would indicate that we were entirely wrong... and, in fact, we were,” he said.

However, Klaas Meijer, spokesman for the Dutch Ministry of Defence, cautioned that such actions could undermine the country’s ability to respond to contemporary threats.

He said that the last Cabinet stated rehabilitation could only occur if there is proof that the men were aware of the violence.

“We still have national service, although the obligation to serve has been suspended. If the threat from Russia escalated into war, it would undermine national service,” he was quoted as saying.