On 2 August 1946, Sûreté officers arrested Robert Winter, Émile Krieps, Rudy Ensch, and Jean Juttel, who were all released later the same day.[1]: 36 Also arrested was Albert Wingert, who was accused of "Attentat und Komplott gegen die Staatsform, innere Gefährdung der Staatssicherheit", and received an interdiction de communiquer.[1]: 36 Wingert was kept for 9 days in solitary confinement. After 3 months of investigation against him, his case too was closed.[1]: 36 On 10 October 1946 an ordonnance de non-lieu in his case was ordered.[1]: 36
The Unteradjustant of the Sûreté, Jean Wictor, who had been a policeman during the occupation, wrote reports about the activities of Wingert. Wictor was also personally criticised several times by Resistance members.[1]: 36
Krieps, Juttel and Winter had all been key witnesses in the Gomand trial, against Bech, Bodson and Dupong.[1]: 37
COPIED TO BELOW
Around this time, in Resistance circles there was severe criticism of the political insignificance of the Resistance.[1]: 37 In pubs and at meetings of the Resistance groups, criticism was uttered against the direction of political developments, especially by Wingert, who attacked the clientelism and Vetternwirtschaft of the parties; the watering-down of the term "Resistance", the way the épuration was being carried out, the sterile hyperpatriotism of some groups of the Resistance.[1]: 37
In the 1970s, former Justice minister Victor Bodson declared that the talk of the Putsch had been rubbish, and the foreign minister Bech had given the instruction to arrest the "Putschists".[1]: 37
THe "Putschists" were not well treated in the press.[1]: 37 The nation as a whole wanted to move on, and turn their back on the war. The population want to return to the pre-war time.[1]: 37 The Resistants and former concentration camp inmates disapproved of the process of normalisation, they had hoped for a new beginning, instead of a restauration.[1]: 37 The Putsch affair is therefore also the end of a "malaise" felt in Resistance circles felt from mid 1945 to Sep 1946, which was much mentioned in the press at the time.[1]: 37
The state had not included the Resistants, but collaborators and opportunists had a good life; they dominated the economy, and the government administration.[1]: 37
Luxembourgish liberation was on 10 September 1944. For a short while, the Unio'n maintained order, arresting many collaborators, and taking care of supplying the population with food.[1]: 37
Return of the government in exile was on 23 September 1944.[1]: 37
Pierre Dupong was heavily criticised by the Unio'n. The Unio'n movements wanted to be more closely involved in politics, and represented in government. This criticism somewhat abated when Unio'n-friendly politicians were included in the government. But criticism still remained.[1]: 37
One forum for this criticism was the Consultative Assembly from February 1945 onwards.[1]: 37
The government wanted to have a forum for public opinion, and a body before which to justify its policies and to legitimate them.[1]: 38
Various themes were discussed in the Assembly, including épuration.[1]: 38
The épuration trials started on 9 April 1945.[1]: 38 Apart from criminal trials, there were also disciplinary procedures, agaisnt civil servants. Some in the Consultative Assembly criticised that it was the "small" collaborators who were investigated. Membership in the VdB was also a prickly issue.[1]: 38
The Resistants in general were unhappy with the apparent lenience shown towards collaborators, and épuration.[1]: 38 At the same time, the government was trying to portray the whole country as one of Resistants, which watered down the role of the actual, active Resistants.[1]: 38
The PM, Pierre Dupong, is quoted as saying that 95% of Luxembourgers had been Resistants.[1]: 38
This stretched the definition of "Resistant" to mean nothing.
But Dupongs views became widespread in the population. (The active Resistants were a minority)
This provoked widespread criticism, voiced at informational meetings of the Luxemburger Batterie, on the failures of the gov't in exile, meetings which took place on 4 July, 8 July (in Esch), 15 July, and 16 July.[1]: 39
The Esch assembly resulted in a resolution sponsored by the representatives of several Resistance organisations, which claimed (amongst other things) the Luxembourgish government had no legitimacy,[1]: 39 also condemning the government for its actions against L'Indépendant.[1]: 40
The Indépendant, founded by Norbert Gomand and Charles Gordian Troeller.[1]: 40 These two had helped Luxembourgish wartime refugees in Franco's Spain, to get to the United Kingdom.[1]: 40
They criticised the gov't in exile for doing little to help these refugees.[1]: 40
On 30 August 1945, Thoss, Dupont, and Goman were accused of slander against the government, for what they had said at the above-mentioned meetings.[1]: 40 The trial would last until March 1947.[1]: 40 114 witnesses were called.[1]: 40
On 29 March 1947, Gomand was sentenced to pay a fine.[1]: 40
On 21 October 1945, national elections took place, which resulted in a National Union government of all the parties.[1]: 40 There was still discontent among former Resistance members, who believed the former government-in-exile lacked legitimacy, and vehement criticism of the political circumstances was voiced at public meetings an in pubs. However, there was now no parliamentary opposition, so criticism was articulated outside the parliament.[1]: 40 The government tended to react very sensitively to this criticism, as seen in their reaction to the so-called Putsch. [1]
The celebrations after the war in Luxembourg were a lively expression of national joy an patriotic unity.[2] If the mood was slightly dampened by attacks on the collaborators, the authorities rapidy brought this under control, and after the Ardennes offensive, there began a period of material and moral reconstruction, which was to lead to a normalisation again. Grand Duchess Charlotte was to return in April 1945, which was to signal the start of a series of patriotic celebrations, which had their highpoint in 1946.[2] But the cleavages in society were to become apparent soon.[2]
The government in exile was, after its return, exposed to hefty criticism: foremost, it was the representatives of the Resistance, who objected to the fact of the pre-war politicians trying to return to Luxmebourg and to continue the business of government as before the war.[2] The legitimacy of Pierre Dupong's government was called into question, as it governed for months without a legislature and then with the pseudo-representative Consultative Assembly, and because it did not take sufficient account of the Resistance's interests.[2]
The Resistance groups, some of them highly politicised, formed a sort of non-parliamentary opposition.[2]
They included Albert Wingert, who had been in concentration camp.[2] He remained a vehement critic of the government, who was not quieted by the first post-war elections in October 1945, resulting in a National Union government.[2]
One of the most controversial topics after the war was the épuration question.
One side thought the collaborators could hardly be punished strongly enough, others believed it was more important to punish the worst of the worst.[2]
This debate was also led inside the parties themselves, and in the political groups on the left and the right, people were unsure how to treat party members and functionaries who had cooperated with the enemy.[2]
In the newly founded CSV, Pierre Dupong propagated the view that the party should be open to all those who agreed with the CSV's fundamental beliefs. There was to be no wide-ranging cleanup within the CSV:
...
With the rebirth of the conservative and socialist parties, the political landscape from before the war did not seem to have changed much. Yet the Union'n, as a political umbrella group, developed into competition for the established parties.[2] There were (futile) talks and negotiations between the Unio'n and the large political parties, regarding possible cooperation.[2]
The political new beginning in Luxembourg was also difficult because large parts of the population harboured suspicions towards the parties. This was partly due to the partisan political disputes of the pre-war time, and the experience of the war. Some even had dreams of a party-less state.[2]: 48
The CSV, as heir of the Party of the Right, tried to spread a most positive portrayal and interpretation of its ministers' actions, such that the government's decision to leave the country in the war was a visionary and historic one.[2]: 48 It was portrayed as well-thought out decision, which was a starting shot for the resistance of the Luxembourgish people.[2]: 48
The lack of unity after the war was illustrated by the plurality of the forms and locations of commemoration of the war.[2]: 49 In the 1950s, the forms of commemoration had already been cemented: the veterans of the 2 World Wars gathered at the Monument du Souvenir, the Resistants gathered at the Musée de la Résistance, and the concentration camp inmates gathered at the "Hinzerter Kreuz".[2]: 49 There was no central commemorative location until the erection of the Monument de la Solidarité in 1971.[2]: 49 Equally, there was no common commemoration day. From 1946, the country had a Journée de Commémoration Nationale. This was fixed to be at the same time as an event which never actually occurred, namely the planned census of 10 Octobe 1941, which had been cancelled. The decision to have the commemoration day then was a politically intelligent one, as the Personenstandsaufnahme was an act more of passive Resistance than of active Resistance, and thus one with which most Luxembourgers could identify. The majority of Luxembourgers had only been able to resist passively under the occupation, whilst it was a small minority which engaged in printing leaflets or engaging in armed Resistance.[2]
The establishment of this national day of commemoration did not prevent the occurrence of other individual events, organised "from bottom up", by survivors and veterans organisations. Several of these organisations had formed after the war and tried to keep the memory of their deeds alive.[2]
On 1 September 1945, there had been large-scale commemorative events for the 3rd anniversary of the strike of 1942, but this soon lost significance and was only celebrated locally. Similarly, 10 September, the day of Liberation, was only celebrated at a few round anniversaries (such as 1954). The public interest in these official celebrations tended to subside dramatically in the 1950s already.[2]