Six suspects admit role in Rotterdam synagogue attack, deny knowledge of target

Four people accused of an attack on a synagogue in Rotterdam on 13 March have admitted their involvement, it emerged during a preliminary hearing on Tuesday at the Rotterdam court. They say they were unaware that the target was a synagogue. Two additional suspects have so far chosen not to comment. Prosecutors allege they had a “facilitating and coordinating” role in the incident.

The suspects are alleged to have directed the attackers, supplying them with addresses and money for fuel. Prosecutors say the four alleged perpetrators were promised 3,000 euros for carrying out the attack. On Tuesday, six suspects aged 17 to 23 are due to appear before the court. Five come from Tilburg, while the oldest is from Amsterdam. The case involving the minor will be handled in private proceedings.

The Public Prosecution Service classifies the explosion as a terrorist attack, arguing it was aimed at causing “serious fear” within the Jewish community. The prosecutor described it as an incident that “hit the Jewish community at its core and continues to have a lasting impact.” At the same time, prosecutors say they do not believe the suspects themselves were driven by an ideological motive to intimidate the Jewish population.

At the explosion at A.B.N. Davidsplein, a Cobra 6 firecracker and a bottle of petrol were used. “Thanks to swift action by the police, a second explosion at the synagogue on Mozartlaan was prevented,” the prosecutor said. Four suspects were immediately arrested.

A pro-Iranian group, Harakat Ashab al-Yamin al-Islamiya (HAYI), has claimed responsibility for the attacks. Images reportedly appeared on the group’s Telegram channel around 45 minutes after the explosion. The organisation has also claimed similar incidents in Liège in Belgium and in Greece, and on 9 March announced what it called a “military operation” targeting American and Israeli institutions.

The Public Prosecution Service states that it does not see any connection between these suspects and other incidents elsewhere in the country. In March and April, a series of explosions targeted Jewish institutions in Amsterdam and Nijkerk.

The perpetrators are said to have been recruited via social media. Several lawyers argued that their clients did not know what a synagogue was. “I explained it to my client at the police station,” one of them said.

However, the Public Prosecution Service argues the buildings were clearly identifiable as Jewish premises, featuring symbols such as a Star of David and Hebrew writing. Prosecutors also say messages suggest the suspects knew there was a high risk of being caught because the locations were “well known.”