The Netherlands has made historic strides in transparency by digitizing the names of 425,000 people suspected of collaborating with the Nazis during WWII. This initiative, backed by the Huygens Institute, aims to facilitate research into the country's painful history while raising concerns about privacy and the potential for public backlash.
Online Archive Unveils 425,000 Names of Suspected Nazi Collaborators
Online Archive Unveils 425,000 Names of Suspected Nazi Collaborators
Dutch National Archives launch extensive database on WWII collaborators, sparking debate over transparency and privacy.
The names of around 425,000 people suspected of collaborating with the Nazis during the German occupation of the Netherlands have been published online for the first time. This release comes from the Dutch National Archives and includes individuals who were investigated through a special legal system set up toward the end of World War II. Out of those listed, over 150,000 faced some form of punishment related to their actions during the occupation.
Previously, the full records of these investigations had only been accessible through visits to the National Archives in The Hague. The Huygens Institute, which played a key role in digitizing the archive, states that this move removes a significant barrier for those wishing to delve into the Netherlands' wartime history, noting that it serves a wide range of interests — from children seeking to understand their father's wartime choices to historians exploring the nuances of collaboration.
The archive contains a wealth of information regarding alleged war criminals, the approximately 20,000 Dutch individuals who joined the German armed forces, and supposed members of the National Socialist Movement (NSB), the Dutch Nazi party. Importantly, it also includes names of individuals eventually cleared of suspicion. The database is composed of materials from the Special Jurisdiction, which began investigating potential collaborators in 1944.
While the online archive lists these suspects alongside their birth dates and locations, it does not reveal the outcomes of their investigations or the nature of their alleged collaboration. Users are directed to specific files for more detailed information, which remain accessible in person at the National Archives, with the stipulation of declaring a legitimate interest in accessing such sensitive materials.
The decision to publish these names has sparked concern over the implications of revealing personal information from such a sensitive time in history. Rinke Smedinga, whose father was involved with the NSB, expressed worries about potential negative responses arising from public access to this information, urging caution as society navigates this challenging aspect of its past.
Tom De Smet, director of the National Archives, addressed these concerns, recognizing the need to consider the feelings of both relatives of collaborators and victims of the occupation. He noted, however, that the act of collaboration is still an unspoken trauma in Dutch society, and hopes that opening the archives will help alleviate the stigma surrounding this chapter of history.
Culture Minister Eppo Bruins emphasized the importance of archival openness for confronting and reconciling with the Netherlands' complex wartime past. In a parliamentary letter, he acknowledged the nuanced dialogue around privacy versus transparency, indicating potential legislative changes to pave the way for broader public access to related data. Notably, individuals who remain alive will not have their names included in the public online records.