The brothers find an oilfield in Colombia worth at least $ 70 billion. On paper they are the richest Dutch of all times. But the euphoria was short-lived. Their oil rights are suddenly taken away and transferred to a large American company in the same area. Henk is arrested and sentenced to twenty years in a Colombian prison.

The brothers say they’re victim of a massive conspiracy between secret services and members in the highest circles of the Colombian government.

Initially, almost nobody believes their incredible story. But slowly, the brothers find more and more documents and witnesses that support their claims. The more the brothers are uncovering the truth, the more ruthless their opponents become in Colombia, the U.S and even in the Netherlands.

Books can be ordered online: www.deolievlek.nl

Click on the picture to enlarge

Key points: motions Colombia & Ecopetrol:

Llanos Oil never complied with an escrow deposit of $2.5 million as required by Ecopetrol

No link between The cancellation of the Oil & Gas Contract and The case vs. Hendrik van Bilderbeek

Response Llanos Oil to key points of Colombia & Ecopetrol:

Denial of Justice:

Llanos Oil files a complaint with the Attorney General of Colombia Mr. Edgardo Maya against Ecopetrol, Drummond and Fabio Echeverry (Chairman of the Board of Directors of Ecopetrol) on 6 April 2004.

The complaint is concerning the wrongful termination of Llanos’ oil contract Guatapuri by Ecopetrol and allocation of the contract to Drummond.

Nothing is heard anymore of this investigation until four years later shortly before the trial of Hendrik van Bilderbeek.

The Attorney General Edgardo Maya had a huge problem, his brother Jaime Blanco Maya appeared to have been involved in the murders of Drummond’s union leaders.

Jaime blanco has confessed participating in the murders.

Direct relationship between the wrongful termination of the Llanos Oil contract and the

arrest of Hendrik van Bilderbeek.

Before the contract could become valid & effective, Llanos Oil had to comply before 13 January 2003 with fulfilling clause 40 of the contract by depositing $ 2.5 million in an escrow account in favor of Ecopetrol

Llanos Oil complies clausule 40 with  by depositing $ 2.5 million USD.

Ecopetrol declared the Guatupuri contract valid & effective on 06 February 2003.

Colombia and Ecopetrol did not want Llanos Oil to have this contract.

Colombia and Ecopetrol wanted Drummond to have this contract.

Colombia engineered false charges against Hendrik van Bilderbeek as confirmed by Rafael Garcia Testimony the former deputy director of the DAS.

Colombia falsely accused Hendrik van Bilderbeek of money laundering.

Colombia proceeded by informing the bank (holding the $ 2.5 million USD in escrow) that Hendrik van Bilderbeek was involved in money laundering.

The bank suddenly reported to Ecopetrol there was no $ 2.5 million USD on the escrow account.

As a direct result of the false charges against Hendrik the road was opened for Ecopetrol to cancel Llanos Oil’s contract and to transfer it immediately to Drummond.

Can Ecopetrol collect their funds in Hollland?

If the answer is “yes” then the Court will rule in favour of Llanos Oil.

ABN (RBS) has to reply by 05 June 12.

SAMARIO TO TESTIFY ON MARCH 12, 2012 IN VALLEDUPAR CIRCUIT COURT

After years of procedural issues in the ongoing human rights case against the Drummond Company in the United States based on Drummond’s close relationship to the AUC, the first of several key demobilized AUC members will testify on March 12, 2012 at 8:30 am in the Valledupar Circuit Court. Alcides Manuel Mattos Tabares, alias Samario, will testify under a “Letters Rogatory,” a process of legal cooperation between the United States court and the Colombian judicial system.
Samario has supplied a December 4, 2009 sworn Declaration to the United States court. Based on that detailed statement, he is expected to testify to that:

– From August or September 2000 until May 2002, he was the chief of security for Oscar José Ospino Pacheco, alias “Tolemaida,” commander of the Juan Andrés Álvarez Front.

– On December 10, 2002, he became the third commanding officer in the Front, and was in charge of the “grupo de urbanos.” He was in charge of patrolling the areas where Drummond had its rail line and conducting cleansing campaigns to kill all guerilla sympathizers in the area. This work was at Drummond’s direction.

– In November 2000, he attended a meeting with Alfredo Araujo Castro, Manager of Community Relations for Drummond, Jaime Blanco Maya and Tolemaida. At this meeting, Araujo told Tolemaida that the AUC had to kill all of the Drummond union leaders because the union was causing problems for Drummond.

– He attended a meeting in early May, 2001 with Tolemaida, Blanco, Araujo, along with an American from Drummond. At this meeting Drummond made arrangements with Tolemaida to give a large payment of US$1.5 million to Jorge 40, Commander of the Northern Block, and also to make monthly payments of approximately US$100,000 to the Juan Andrés Álvarez Front. With these funds, the Front greatly increased its military capacity.

– Until he was captured on April 9, 2005, Samario participated in many operations based on the agreement with Drummond, and killed many people in the area along Drummond’s rail line. On many occasions, direction as to who to kill came from Drummond directly. Also, the Front coordinated with Drummond’s private security force, which would contact the AUC to report unauthorized persons in the rail line area, and the AUC would respond and take action based on these reports.

Terry Collingsworth of Conrad & Scherer, the lead counsel for the more than 600 Colombian victims who brought the Drummond human rights case in the United States, stated that “I am delighted that after so many years of struggle, we are about to hear testimony of what really happened, and how Drummond was a major force behind the AUC’s war effort in Cesar. We appreciate the cooperation of the Colombian government in beginning the important evidentiary hearings. The next step for justice must be that the Drummond officials who were behind Drummond’s participation in war crimes be prosecuted by the Colombian authorities.”

Unlike Ecopetrol’s comments that Llanos Oil did not meet its contractual obligations. Ecopetrol approved Llanos Oil for meeting its contractual obligations on 06 February 2003 Llanos and Ministry of Mines approved Llanos Oil’s technical work program 2002 on 17 September 2003.

Contrary to Ecopetrol’s official reply to the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) Llanos Oil did not loose its court case before The Middle District Court of Florida (and not The Southern District Court as alleged by Ecopetrol). Instead Llanos Oil voluntarily withdrew its case, right after the judge denied Drummond’s four motions “to dismiss”.

Contrary to Ecopetrol’s publication, Ecopertol was not part of the 2005 lawsuit. Instead its then current president and two former officers of Ecopetrol were part of the lawsuit.

Llanos Oil felt that it could not obtain a “Fair Trial” as judge Antoon was also the same judge used in the DEA set up against “Llanos Oil/van Bilderbeeks”.

Contrary to Ecopetrol’s publication, The 7 billion euro claim is 10% advance of damages and not as stated by Ecopetrol the full damages.

Colombia decided not to file any further motions on 14 December 2011 as requested by the Judge last 09 November, 2011.  The judge of The Hague, in turn, has ruled that Colombia is not allowed anymore to file any further motions on the subject of the Dutch’s judge authority and jurisdiction.

Ecopetrol has requested Llanos Oil for an extensionof six (6) weeks to file their motion further substantiating their argument onthe issue of authority and jurisdiction of the Dutch judge.

Llanos Oil has agreed with the extension request from Ecopetrol.

Ecopetrol will now have to file their motion by 25 January 2012.

Given Itochu’s unusually strong expression of respect for human rights, the only reasonable explanation for Itochu’s investment in Drummond is that Itochu Japan does not have the facts about Drummond’s direct involvement in war crimes and other major human rights violations in Colombia.

This is an authentic statement by Alvaro Uribe, then president of Colombia under whose administration the fraud against Llanos was perpetrated:

Política |13 Jun 2011 – 7:29 am
Uribe acepta que recomendó asilo a María del Pilar Hurtado
Por: Elespectador.com

“Le comenté a varios compañeros de gobierno, quejosos de que no tenían garantías de la justicia, que buscaran el asilo”, aseguró el expresidente.

Translation: “ I commented to various associates of the government, who complained they had no guarantees of the judicial system, that they should seek asylum”, assured the ex president.
This in defense of yet another accused director of the DAS (also nominated by Uribe) who fled Colombia for “lack of guarantees”:

directora del DAS en Panamá:

Por: REDACCIÓN ELTIEMPO.COM | 7:12 a.m. | 08 de Julio del 2011

María del Pilar Hurtado, ex directora del DAS.
Foto: Archivo

A María del Pilar Hurtado le habrían quitado documentos y otros elementos personales.

La ex directora del Departamento Administrativo de Seguridad viajó a Panamá y pidió asilo porque consideró que la Justicia colombiana no le ofreció garantías dentro de la investigación por las interceptaciones ilegales que hizo esa agencia de seguridad contra magistrados, integrantes de la oposición y periodistas.

Translation:  “The ex director of the Administrative Department of Security travelled to Panama and requested asylum because she considered that the Colombian Justice did not offer her guarantees within the investigation for illegal wire taps …”

31-03-2011     The Toronto Stock Exchange      Toronto          CA
30-03-2011     COLT Telecom Group Limited      Amsterdam     NL
30-03-2011     Ernst and Young LLP                  Indianapolis   US
29-03-2011     JPMorgan Chase & Co.       Columbus       US
28-03-2011     IHS Energy Group                       Stafford          US

Fiscal

This was necessary and timed so that the Rafael Garcia statements presented before the Colombian parliament in March of that same year could be ignored and US Ambassador Wood could cite this case as a prime example of successful cooperation in the fight against laundering and terrorism in the Cartagena (Colombia) regional conference of July, 2007 – see

It was further timed for its real intended purpose of an undisclosed financial transaction.

The US authorities still feed the World File with false statements, as Albert van Bilderbeek was never the subject of any proceedings, least in Colombia.

Noguera was mentioned by Rafael Garcia has having led the set up of Llanos Oil under orders of the president, to transfer the Llanos Oil contract to Drummond.

el tiempo sentencing noguera 14sep11

ny times sentencing noguera 14sep11

Llanos Oil submits reply to the Court of The Hague in reply to Colombia’s and Ecopetrol’s motion to question the authority and jurisdiction of the Dutch judge.

Colombia and Ecopetrol are to reply in court on 25 May 2011.

Court will rule on 12 October 2011.

De Volkskrant

The reason for issuing this letter is the recent erroneous reply by the Dutch Ministry of Economic Affairs  (minister Verhagen) stating: “Drummond states to be acquitted. It is not possible for the Dutch government to confirm whether Drummond is innocent or guilty”

Attorney Collingsworth expresses his concerns to Minister Verhagen as according to the weblog of Llanos Oil also Ecopetrol and ABN AMRO BANK were part of what seems a conference among Minister Verhagen, Drummond, Baker & Bots, Ecopetrol, The Colombian Embassy The Hague and ABN AMRO BANK NV.

Is Minister Verhagen trying to protect the interests of Drummond, Ecopetrol and ABN over the interests of Llanos Oil/van Bilderbeeks (as minister Verhagen did with denying Henk van Bilderbeek’s renewal of his Dutch passport, which ultimately was overturned by the Dutch court) and the interests of Colombian victims?

El Tiempo newspaper article dated May 15, 2010 clearly states that GIORGIO SALE was free until his arrest in Italy in 2007 despite the Colombian arrests of Sept. 30, 2004; SALE is a resident of Colombia and had no arrest warrants or apparent public investigations there, as GIORGIO SALE was busy entertaining the high Colombian judiciary.

Sustaining this fact and after the arrests of Llanos Oil’s management in Colombia.  The US Dept. of Justice issued a Request for Rogatory assistance (25 February 2005) to the Colombian authorities falsely accusing “van Bilderbeeks” and “Llanos Oil” belonging to the “Pannunzi” organization.

Key question: “whether or not Drummond’s Colombian president Jiminez was or was not in Colombia at the time of the union leader assassinations”

President Uribe claimed Drummond’s president was not in Colombia at the time of the union leader assassinations and disclaiming ex-DAS IT Director Rafael Garcia witness testimony confirming that Jiminez was in Colombia during the time of the assassinations .

But, contrary to president Uribe’s statement that president Jiminez was not in Colombia during the time of the union leader assassinations,  immigrations documents of the DAS including an interview held by Mr. Jiminez himself with the Colombian newspaper El Tiempo prove the contrary.

Refer to “Hypothesis” followed by “Drummond and the Colombian president”

Until today no reply from ABN AMRO BANK NV.

22 October 2008, The Court of The Hague granted Llanos Oil to seize assets for a period of six (6) months.

17 April 2009, The Court of The Hague grants Llanos Oil an extension to seize assets for a period of one (1) year valid until 22 April 2010.

According The Court of Amsterdam, lawyers for Llanos Oil should have informed ABN of said extension of one (1) additional year.

Lexence lawyers have argued in front of The Court of Amsterdam “as ABN replied “negative” to our summons there was “no grounds” having to inform ABN of the additional one (1) year extension to seize assets as granted by the Judge of The Court of The Hague”.

Expecting this decision by The Court of The Hague, Lexence lawyers have meanwhile refilled a motion with The Court of The Hague to seize ABN’s assets. The Court of The Hague has granted this motion and Bailiffs on behalf of Lexence Lawyers (Llanos Oil) meanwhile have served ABN with a new summons.

Criminal proceedings are currently under way against ABN AMRO BANK NV.

ABN AMRO BANK NV acts as banker on behalf of The Colombian Government, Ecopetrol and Drummond all with activities/accounts using “sweep” accounts” in the Cayman Islands and Bermuda (“Black Gold” managed by Adriana Echeverri VP Ecopetrol).

What is the real reason ABN AMRO BANK NV is hiding the truth? Conspiracy, money laundering or otherwise?