but she refused to do so vs. but she refused

[GoodTaste]

Could "to do so" be removed without altering the original meaning of the sentence?

Why or why not?

(It seems to me that without "to do so", it is still clear as ever because the premise ("Her captors wanted her to publicly renounce M") is unambiguous and "but she refused" uniquivocally refers to "but she refused (to publiclly renounce M)". I can't tell why. Hence the thread.

=======================
Her captors wanted her to publicly renounce M, but she refused to do so.

Source: Wikipedia

 

[tedmc]

I'd say "to do so" is understood and is optional.

 

[jutfrank]

Yes, removing it doesn't alter the meaning.