Topics

Government policy

Policing and criminal justice system

Violence and harassment

Asylum seekers and refugees

Education

Media

Employment

Extreme-Right politics

Immigration law

Housing

Health

Sport

Features

Reports

Black history

Statistics and definitions

Quiz

Schools against deportations

Reclaiming the struggle

Far-Right in Europe

IRR > European Race Bulletin > Netherlands > Asylum seekers and refugees

Populist anti-asylum movement born at Kollum

By Liz Fekete and Mieke Hoppe

1 March 2000

The Dutch policy of dispersing asylum-seekers to reception centres across the country has been seriously undermined following events in the small village of Kollum in the largely rural northern province of Friesland where a witchhunt against asylum-seekers followed the rape and murder of a 16-year-old Dutch girl.

As a new political party is born to oppose the creation of more reception centres in the north of the Netherlands, and as more and more towns and villages follow the path laid down at Kollum of opposing the dispersal of asylum-seekers, the Institute of Race Relations asks what role the media played in inflaming opinion against asylum-seekers there. And we ask what the long-term effects of events at Kollum will be for Dutch asylum policy.

Ever since 1 May 1999, when Marianne Vaatstra, was raped and murdered near Kollum, some villagers from Kollum and the surrounding area have agitated vociferously against residents at a nearby temporary asylum-seekers residence centre (AZC). But when the local authority, in conjunction with the Asylum-Seekers' Reception Service (COA), called an open meeting on 8 October to discuss building a permanent AZC in the area things came to a head. Some villagers formed the 'Committee AZC No', mobilising 1000 people to a rally outside the public meeting. When demonstrators subsequently entered the meeting, some young people broke off, attempting to attack the platform speakers by pelting them with eggs.

The so-called 'riot' at Kollum quickly came to dominate national news and it was not long before anti-asylum activists announced the formation of the 'Party for a Safe and Caring Society 2000' to coordinate opposition to any new AZCs in the north of the Netherlands and, possibly, across the whole country. To understand how this new populist anti-asylum movement came to be born at Kollum it is necessary to chart the process whereby asylum-seekers were collectively held under suspicion for the murder of Marianne Vaatstra. Despite conclusive evidence that five suspects from the AZC were innocent of the crime, that suspicion persists today.

Prejudices against asylum-seekers let loose after murder

The rural northern province of Friesland - whose population speaks its own officially recognised language - is well-known for its lakes, ice-skating, tourist breaks and cattle breeding. For four years, around 5000 Kollum villagers lived in relative peace with the 425 or so residents of the Poelpleats temporary AZC, situated between the villages of Kollum and Buitenpost. But all this changed on 1 May 1999 when Marianne Vaatstra was raped, her throat cut in the early hours of the morning as she cycled home from a disco to the neighbouring village of Zwaagwesteinde. Suspicion immediately fell on the residents of the Poelpleats, with rumours circulating that the police had failed to investigate AZC residents, allowing an Iraqi suspect to disappear without trace.

During this tense time, a gang of men from local villages attempted to break into the AZC but were prevented by police who had placed it under surveillance. The local councils of Kollumerland and Dantumadeel called a press conference asking that the police be allowed to carry out their investigations unhindered. Against this background of rumour and suspicion the local authority and the COA called an open meeting to discuss the creation of a new permanent AZC on the outskirts of Kollum.

Kollum 'Committee AZC No' launched

In retrospect it seems strange that a consultation process about a new asylum-seeker residence centre was launched in this obviously charged climate. But the local council and the COA, which took the view that the silent majority were not opposed to the AZC, had a responsibility to press ahead with implementing the government's asylum policy which disperses asylum-seekers throughout the whole of the Netherlands. As arrangements at the existing AZC were only temporary (negotiations in 1995 with the local community stated that the reception centre could only be operational for five years), the local council was under a duty to provide permanent accommodation. But opponents of any new centre for the accommodation of around 400 people had already argued that its proposed situation, just north of Kollum, would overburden the small village. Furthermore, its proposed site was on land that had previously been earmarked for agricultural use.

In the event, the consultation meeting was disrupted after just thirty minutes. Around 1000 people from Kollum and surrounding villages mobilised by 'Committee AZC No' had rallied outside, chanting slogans like 'Away with the AZCs (And take away the mayor as well') and 'Listen to your own population'. A petition was circulated which stated that local people would not be safe if a new centre was created. Bauke Vaatstra, Marianne Vaatstra's father, spoke only to blame Dutch asylum policy for his daughter's death and to call for a referendum on the proposed new AZC. He announced the formation of a confidential service for Dutch citizens to report on problem asylum-seekers, declaring that it was time that an organisation was established across the north of Holland to prevent the creation of any more ACZs.

Following the rally, protesters marched in a large group into the meeting hall where some youths broke away to pelt speakers with eggs. Piet Visser, the mayor of Kollumerland and Nieuwkruisland, and the COA representative, had to be escorted out of the building for their own safety.

The 'Committee AZC No' took no responsibility for the violence. Organiser Hilly Veenstra - herself under investigation for a speech inside the meeting that may have violated anti-discrimination laws - says that the police had been warned of the possibility that racists and neo-Nazis would be present. According to Ytsen Van der Velde of the Party for a Safe and Caring 2000, the meeting should not have been abandoned. 'At every football match disturbances break out' but 'football matches are not broken up just like that'.

Did the media inflame prejudices against asylum-seekers?

But if these were the actual events, what role did the media play in inciting anger and fomenting suspicion in Kollum both prior to the public meeting and in its aftermath? Since May 1999, the killing of Marianne Vaatstra and so-called universal opposition in Kollum to the AZC has constantly been discussed in the media with sections attacking the police's handling of the murder investigation and implying that too much had been done to protect residents at the AZC.

In this way, the framework within which the media would report the events at Kollum had already been established - violence must be condemned, but the frustration, even the xenophobia it epitomised, was understandable. From here on Kollum dominated media news stories in the second week of October. On 8 October, Kollum was the main item of discussion on national radio and television - dominating news, current affairs and discussion programmes. Nearly all the coverage on commercial television channels took a negative view of asylum-seekers, implying that the Kollum 'riot' was understandable as frustration over asylum-crime, particularly harassment and theft, is growing. The day after the disrupted meeting, swarms of TV crews descended on Kollum to get the views of local villagers - not all of whom (see below) were against the AZC or held negative views of asylum-seekers. On the other hand, the presence of TV crews certainly emboldened younger members of the public. As soon as youngsters saw a TV crew approach, they would shout - 'AZC away with it'.

The results of the police investigation over the next two weeks and, in particular the arrest and release of the main Iraqi suspect, were to dampen some of the media's enthusiasm for the now regulation story - asylum-seekers = crime. Having tracked down and arrested the Iraqi suspect in Istanbul and, having established, through DNA samples, that he was not the murderer, the Leeuwarden public prosecutor, Oebele Brouwer called a press conference to condemn the 'witchhunt' against asylum-seekers which was hindering the police's murder investigation. He singled out for particular criticism a crimewatch programme which had taken up local rumours against the ACZ and established them as fact.

Crimewatch programme on commercial channel criticised

Following the murder, Peter R. de. Vries, a popular crime reporter who hosts a crimewatch programme on a commercial channel, devoted an entire edition of the programme to the Marianne Vaatstra case. De Vries insinuated that the local authority and the police had been involved in a conspiracy to cover up the fact that asylum-seekers were suspected of the crime because they feared loss of support for asylum policy. De Vries' programme - the sensational format of which has been criticised in the past - focused extensively on the missing Iraqi who had left the AZC the day after the murder and was the programme's chief suspect.

At the press conference, organised after DNA tests had established the innocence of the Iraqi who had been traced to Turkey, the Leeuwarden public prosecutor, Brouwer, set out the police's case against the production company which made the crimewatch slot. Produced for the commercial TV channel Net 5, De Vries' programme is not officially supported by the police who work closely with 'Osporing Verzocht' (Wanted by the Police), a programme of a similar format which is produced for the AVRO public broadcasting channel in collaboration with police who determine which cases are taken up and when. Brouwer reported that the police, far from being complacent about the AZC, took statements from asylum-seekers at an early stage of the investigation. But he also pointed out that of around 500 tip-offs from the public received by the police, and of 1000 statements taken as a result of these tip-offs, not one mentioned a dark-skinned person near the scene of the crime. Yet Peter de Vries had transmitted a photograph of the Iraqi, Ali Hussein Hasan, on the programme even before criminal investigators had named him as a suspect (extremely controversial in the Dutch context as for years the media were not supposed to publish the full name and picture of a suspect without prior police agreement). An investigation has been launched as to how the crimewatch programme got hold of pictures that had not been released either by the public prosecutor's office or the special team investigating Vaastra's murder.

In this way, the crimewatch programme legitimised rumour and suspicion, allowing local hysteria to give way to a 'witch hunt' against asylum-seekers. As the investigators saw emotions inflamed, they were powerless to intervene. The police were to take DNA samples from four asylum-seekers at the centre, as well as the Iraqi arrested in Turkey. Having eliminated all five suspects from the AZC, the police now say that they see no reason to suspect any other asylum-seeker from the region, Brouwer commented. Subsequently, the police embarked on a large-scale DNA examination of male inhabitants of the region, concentrating first on known sex offenders and young men from Marianne Vaastra's circle of friends.

But Marianne Vaatstra's family continue to put their faith in the crimewatch journalist, while the 'Committee AZC No' persists in the belief that an asylum-seeker was the murderer. Hilly Veenstra of the Kollum Committee went on record as saying that she still believes that an Iraqi asylum-seeker is to blame. 'Either this is an enormous blunder or is it part of a deliberate strategy. I wonder if they have arrested the right Iraqi?'

When the Iraqi suspect was arrested in Turkey, the Vaatstra family had been jubilant. Following the announcement of the DNA examination results, the press crowded a cafe in Zwagwesteinde to record Mr. Vaatstra's reaction to the news that the Iraqi suspect was not his daughter's killer. But the father was not present. Instead her brother, Freddy Vaatstra read a short statement expressing his family's bitter disappointment at the announcement, adding that the family still believed that their lawyers together with the crime reporter de Vries were best positioned to solve the murder. But later, the Vaastra family backed a call by the mayor of the neighbouring municipality of Dantumadeel (which covers the Zwaagwesteinde area) for a regional DNA examination as the only way to restore peace to the villages.

The role of the regional press

The more thoughtful stance of the independent Frisian newspaper the Leeuwarder Courant which pleaded for tolerance and respect for others can be contrasted with the populist approach of the Nieuwsblad Noord-Oost Friesland which opened up its letters page to attacks on the AZC and subsequently launched a legal help-line for those subjected to investigation for possible contravention of anti-discrimination laws following the Kollum disturbances. The Leeuwarder Courant commissioned a comment piece from the historian journalist Kerst Huisman but was quick to disown it - as legitimising ignorance and prejudice. Huisman had argued that there was a direct connection between the murder of Marianne Vaatstra and Dutch asylum policy, dividing Friesland into a terrified 'us' group and an 'alien' group of potential sex murderers within the ACZ.

But another regional newspaper, was not so self-critical. The Nieuwsblad Noord-Oost Friesland, which had helped fan the hysteria by publishing ranting letters from locals against the AZC was adamant that it had done no wrong. It offered free legal advice to readers who feared prosecution for discriminatory remarks made in letters to the editors of this local newspaper. Editor-in-chief, Anne de Jong, believed that his newspaper could be investigated if action were taken against letter-writers. Describing some of the letters published as 'brutal', he added that this was less evidence of racism than an 'expression of frustration'. For two weeks the paper stopped publishing letters about the AZC. But de Jong later announced that the paper would continue to print letters about the AZC although it would not allow 'slanging matches' or 'racist remarks'.

Did the media paint a false picture of Kollum?

There are other issues raised by the saturation media coverage of Kollum. For instance, did the media allow itself to be manipulated by the 'Committee AZC No', the chief organiser of which, Hilly Veestra did not even come from Kollum but a neighbouring village? Has its coverage of extreme-Right involvement in the protest merely given a platform to the virtually non-existent Dutch far-Right, desperate for media attention? While the national press was, on the whole, more restrained than television, both certainly contributed to the creation of an atmosphere where rumour became fact and the views of the Committee were presented as the universal position of villagers when not all villagers were against the AZC or hostile to asylum-seekers. Many in Kollum are angry at the stigma now attached to the village, pointing out that the violence at the public meeting was carried out by young people from the neighbouring village of Zwaagwesteinde. Mayor Visser was adamant that not everyone was against the AZC. Up to the events of 8 October, the silent majority had not opposed the centre, continued Visser, but now they have to become more vocal in their support.

Will the Netherlands be Kollumised?

Kollum is no longer a local issue. With several other villages, like Sint Annaparochie and Lemmer, announcing opposition to AZCs, the practice of dispersing asylum-seekers throughout the Netherlands is increasingly being challenged. And there is also the question of the new political formation, the 'Party for a Safe and Caring 2000', which has emerged out of the 'Kollum Committee AZC No' campaign? Who are its organisers? Is it manipulated by the far-Right? But the question of far-Right involvement, important though it may be, is not the principle issue. A populist anti-refugee movement is emerging at the grassroots in Holland, and its rallying cry of 'Stop the AZCs' is not confined to poor communities but is just as vociferous in prosperous parts of the country. This is an issue that concerns William Bosma, the editor of the Leeuwarder Courant (8.10.99). 'At Texel shopkeepers have baseball bats ready, in Vught rich people quickly buy the reception space up and in Roden neighbours of a new asylum-seeker residence centre go to court' This 'nasty trend' this culture of 'not in my backyard' is prospering everywhere as values like tolerance and respect for others, essential for communal living, are under pressure. Even disabled people are falling victims to this 'not here mentality' adds Bosma. In Zuid, people at an old people's home staged a referendum, declaring themselves opposed to the creation of sheltered accommodation for some mentally retarded people.

The Kollum factor in national politics

Following the disruption of the public meeting, and reports that children from the AZC had been pelted with stones, the COA and the Kollumerland Council announced that there would be a breathing space before negotiations with local residents were reopened. In calling a 'time out', mayor Visser did not indicate when this would run out, saying that a breathing space was not an admission of weakness but designed to restore peace to the area. Any new AZC, promised Visser, would be patrolled by civic guards and its residents would be informed about Dutch standards and values.

Prime minister Kok entered the debate by saying that he thought that the idea of a 'breathing space' was sensible, adding that resistance to the centre was partly based on 'very understandable emotions'. Apart from this, the government has been notably silent about the events at Kollum. It had refused to get involved, despite the fact that it was the government's policy of dispersal which had been violently challenged at Kollum. Indeed, interior minister Cohen has gone so far as to exclude himself from attempts to find a solution to the Kollum problem, by saying that he considered it a matter solely for the town council. Mayor Visser disagrees. Kollum, he says, is the victim of a national asylum policy that is being forced on local municipalities. Kollum should provide a signal to the government of the need to listen and to change. The question is, if and when change comes, what direction will the government take? Will the government put the protection of asylum-seekers and the guarantee of their human rights first, or will it bow to the populist demands of xenophobes and the culture of 'not in my backyard'.

Other Dutch opposition to asylum accommodation centres

Those who think that the events around Kollum is an isolated case are mistaken. While there are, thankfully, still examples of refugees being accommodated without problems and in association with local communities, the counter-tendency of opposition - ranging from verbal protests to physical violence and even arson - has been all too prevalent in recent years. For instance:

• August 1997 - Den Bosch. Local residents, carrying banners stating 'We do not want Somalis, full is full' formed a hostile reception committee to greet a Somali family due to be housed in the area. After one month, the family felt so threatened that they decided to give up their house. Some local people, who did not oppose the housing of the Somali family, received anonymous threatening phone calls.
• 4 October 1997 - Near a camp for refugees in Dwingeloo, an estimated 20 members of the Volksnationalisten Nederland, shouting 'illegal - end of story', forced refugees to flee.
• October 1997 - After it was announced that 100 asylum-seekers would be housed on the Frisian island of Vlieland, 460 of the 800 islanders signed a petition against them.
• December 1997 - Soest. Following resistance to the arrival of 370 refugees, a fire was started, probably deliberately, in a complex earmarked for the refugees.
• 1 March 1998 - De Klomp. A firework bomb was thrown into a hotel where refugees were due to be accommodated.
• May 1998 - Venlo. A housing association due to accommodate 200 refugees in an empty block of flats received dozens of threatening phone calls. Around 1400 people signed a petition against the refugees.
• 23 August 1998 - Amsterdam. Local government bowed to pressure and desisted with a plan to house 50 refugees in a former old people's home.
• 23 August 1998 - Kampen. Local residents closed down the street and occupied a building reserved for fifty refugees.
• 1 December 1998 - Schiedam. A letter was distributed promising further action if an asylum-seekers residence centre is established.
• 1 December 1998 - Vught. Rich residents paid over one million pounds to buy up a former institute for the blind to stop refugees from being accommodated there.
• 19 February 1999 - Stadskanaal. Mayor and councillors were threatened with death after it was announced that an AZC would, possibly, be relocated to the area.

privacy | using our content | advertising | support us

© Institute of Race Relations 2000