Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 1 of 14

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 08-md-1916-MARRA

IN RE: CHIQUITA BRANDS INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

ALIEN TORT STATUTE AND
SHAREHOLDER DERIVATIVE LITIGATION

This Document Relates To:

ATS ACTIONS

PLAINTIFFS' UNOPPOSED MOTION TO ISSUE REQUESTS FOR JUDICIAL

ASSISTANCE TO TAKE TESTIMONY TO THE CENTRAL AUTHORITY FOR THE
HAGUE SERVICE CONVENTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF COLOMBIA

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

All MDL Plaintiffs, with the exception of the Plaintiffs represented by Paul Wolf (Case

Nos. 10-80652, 11-80404, 11-80405), respectfully move this Court to issue the Requests for

Judicial Assistance, pursuant to the Hague Convention of 18 March 1970 on the Taking of

Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters, to the Central Authority of the Republic of

Colombia, for the taking of depositions to obtain the testimony of key members of the United Self-

Defense Forces of Colombia ("AUC")("Paramilitary Witnesses") and persons who participated in

concealing Chiquita's payments to the AUC ("Convivir Witnesses"), English versions attached

hereto as Exhibit A. These depositions are essential for Plaintiffs' ongoing discovery in the

captioned case.
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 2 of 14

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1781(b)(2) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 28(b)(1)(A) & (B), and the Court's

inherent authority, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court issue the attached Letters Rogatory

seeking testimony of the 16 witnesses whose expected testimony is summarized in section B

below. Each of these deponents is a central figure in this case who, either as AUC commanders or

high-ranking members, or as members or employees of a "Special Vigilance and Private Security

Services" ("Convivir organization"), were involved in forming the AUC's relationship with

Defendant Chiquita, arranging for concealing payments from Chiquita to the AUC, the AUC's

performance of services for Chiquita, implementing the AUC's agreement with Chiquita resulting

in the murder of Plaintiffs' decedents, and/or participating in setting up and operating the Convivir

system to conceal Chiquita's payments to the AUC.

Plaintiffs note that this first round of requested Letters Rogatory concern the key AUC and

Convivir witnesses who have knowledge of the overall AUC relationship with Chiquita that is

relevant evidence for all of the MDL cases. Plaintiffs attempted to reduce the number of this first

round of witnesses by offering to work with Chiquita to narrow the factual issues by stipulation.

Counsel for Chiquita declined to do so.

On an individual case basis, Plaintiffs will necessarily make a second round of requests for

Letters Rogatory of additional AUC witnesses who have knowledge pertaining to their specific

case. Plaintiffs may present a third round of requests for those fact witnesses who may be identified

as discovery continues to progress whose testimony is relevant and material to Plaintiffs' claims

and non-cumulative with that of witnesses already deposed.

Because all witnesses are in Colombia and cannot be served with Rule 45 subpoenas,

Plaintiffs cannot seek non-party discovery from them under the normal discovery rules. The Court,
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 3 of 14

however, has the authority to issue Letters Rogatory, which allow discovery from parties in foreign

countries.

Plaintiffs have consulted with counsel for Defendant Chiquita Brands International and

Chiquita will not oppose the motion.

ARGUMENT

A. The Accompanying Letters Rogatory Should Be Issued Under the Applicable Law.

Letters Rogatory are an essential tool for gathering evidence abroad. See 22 C.F.R. 92.54

("In its broader sense in international practice, the term Letters Rogatory denotes a formal request

from a court in which an action is pending, to a foreign court to perfoiiii some judicial act.

Examples are requests for the taking of evidence, the serving of a summons, subpoena, or other

legal notice, or the execution of a civil judgment. In United States usage, Letters Rogatory have

been commonly utilized only for the purpose of obtaining evidence."); see also Intel Corp. v.

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., 542 U.S. 241, 247 n.1 (2004) (defining Letter Rogatory as "the

request by a domestic court to a foreign court to take evidence from a certain witness") (citations

omitted).

Letters Rogatory may be issued pursuant to the inherent authority of the court. See United

States v. Reagan, 453 F.2d 165, 172 (6th Cir. 1971). Indeed, even where a treaty provides

procedures for obtaining evidence abroad, Letters Rogatory may still be issued pursuant to the

court's inherent authority. See Societe Nationale Industrielle Aerospatiale v. U.S. Dist. Ct. for the

S.D. Ia., 482 U.S. 522, 536 (1987) (holding that the Hague Evidence Convention "was intended

as a permissive supplement, not a pre-emptive replacement, for other means of obtaining evidence

located abroad").
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 4 of 14

The Court's inherent authority to issue Letters Rogatory is bolstered by statute and by the

Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See 28 U.S.C. 1781(a) ("The Department of State has power,

directly, or through suitable channels . . . to receive a letter rogatory issued, or request made, by a

tribunal in the United States, to transmit it to the foreign or international tribunal, officer, or agency

to whom it is addressed, and to receive and return it after execution."); Fed. R. Civ. P. 28(b)(1)

("A deposition may be taken in a foreign country . . . under a letter of request, whether or not

captioned a 'letter rogatory'". . .).

When a party requests the issuance of a Letter Rogatory, it should be issued without

qualification, unless the opposing party can show "good reason" why such a request should not

issue. Zassenhaus v. Evening Star Newspaper Co., 404 F.2d 1361, 1364 (D.C. Cir. 1968); see also

Fed. R. Civ. P. 28(b)(2) ("A letter of request, a commission, or both may be issued . . . without a

showing that taking the deposition in another manner is impracticable or inconvenient."). A court

should "not weigh the evidence that is to be adduced by deposition" nor "attempt to predict,

whether, in fact, the witnesses will be able to give the testimony which is sought." B&L Drilling

Elecs. v. Tote, 87 F.R.D. 543, 545 (W.D. Okla. 1978).

Both the United States and Colombia are parties to the Convention on the Taking of

Evidence Abroad in Civil or Commercial Matters, Mar. 18, 1970, 23 U.S.T. 2555, 847 U.N.T.S.

231 ("Hague Evidence Convention"). The U.S. State Department advises litigants that because

Colombia has made no declarations to the Hague Evidence Convention, requests for compulsion

of evidence are to be "transmitted directly from the requesting court or person in the United States

to the Colombian Central Authority and do not require transmittal via diplomatic channels." See

U.S. State Dep't, Legal Considerations Colombia, at

http://travel.state.gov/content/travel/english/legal-
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 5 of 14

considerations/judicial/country/colombia.html. I This advice is consistent with 28 U.S.C.

1781(b)(2), which preserves the authority of U.S. tribunals to issue requests for judicial assistance

directly to foreign authorities. Because the Paramilitary and Convivir Witnesses are not subject to

the inpersonam jurisdiction of this Court and are located in a foreign country, issuance of Requests

for Judicial Assistance are the proper means to request Colombia to exercise its compulsory

jurisdiction in order to perpetuate their testimony in this case. See, e.g., In re Anschuetz & Co.,

GmbH, 754 F.2d 602, 615 (5th Cir. 1985) ("the Hague Convention is to be employed with the

involuntary deposition of a party conducted in a foreign country, and with the production of

documents or other evidence gathered from persons or entities in the foreign country who are not

subject to the court's in personam jurisdiction").

As provided for in Rule 28(b)(3), the Requests for Judicial Assistance are captioned as

required by the Hague Evidence Convention. The Requests are written in English and, to the

extent granted, will be submitted with a Spanish language translation. See Hague Evidence

Convention art. 4 ("A Letter of Request shall be in the language of the authority requested to

execute it or be accompanied by a translation into that language.") The Letters Rogatory attached

as Exhibit A are all in confoi nity with the specific elements of Article 3 of the Hague Evidence

Convention. Plaintiffs will submit to the Court for signature Spanish translations of all of the

Letters Rogatory granted by the Court.

' The U.S. State Department also advises litigants that by not objecting to voluntary depositions
of willing witnesses in civil or commercial matters, Colombia allows such depositions to be
taken by U.S. consular officers and private attorneys within Colombia. See U.S. State Dep't,
Legal Considerations Colombia, at http://travel.state.govicontent/travel/english/legal-
considerations/judicialkountry/colombia.html.
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 6 of 14

B. The Court Should Issue these Letters Rogatory, which Seek Information Highly
Relevant to this Case.

Each of the AUC paramilitary and Convivir witnesses listed below had personal experience

with the arrangements between paramilitary groups and Defendant Chiquita, and their testimony

will be material, non-cumulative, and highly probative to Plaintiffs' claims. The evidence that

these witnesses may offer is not cumulative; they are uniquely in a position to offer this evidence,

which is relevant and material to the Plaintiffs' claims. See In re Bay City Middlegrounds Landfill

Site v. Kuhlman Electric Corp., 171 F.3d 1044, 1047 (6th Cir. 1999); Cent. States v. Nagy Ready

Mix, Inc., No. 10 cv 0358, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 181942 at *4 (N.D. Ill. Dec. 27, 2012).

This Court previously denied a Letters Rogatory request by Attorney Paul Wolf, whose

team is not participating in this request, stating that Wolf had not shown "that the Defendants

contest the allegation that Plaintiffs' decedents were killed by AUC paramilitary personnel," or

that the evidence requested would "have any bearing on the factual issue of how the Defendants'

alleged misconduct, in financing the AUC, contributed to or facilitated the murders of Plaintiffs'

decedents." Dkt. No. 1546 at 7. In an effort to reduce the need for evidence from paramilitary and

convivir witnesses, Plaintiffs asked Chiquita whether they would stipulate to or concede various

factual issues, using the death of one bellwether decedent as an example. Chiquita refused even to

concede that the decedent had been killed, let alone killed by the AUC or by AUC paramilitaries

from a bloc that had received monetary support from Chiquita; Chiquita would not even concede

that it had paid the AUC's Banana Bloc from 1997 through 2004, that Chiquita had paid convivirs,

or that Chiquita or Banadex employees had ever met with AUC leaders. In ruling on Mr. Wolfs

prior request, the Court also questioned whether the evidence could be obtained from "alternative

sources of information." Dkt. No. 1546 at 8. In an effort to avoid unnecessary burdens, Plaintiffs

also asked Chiquita to stipulate that testimony given by AUC paramilitaries in Colombia's Justice
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 7 of 14

and Peace proceedings would be admissible as prior testimony; again, Chiquita refused. Thus the

depositions of the witnesses listed below are necessary to provide evidence for these basic

elements of Plaintiffs' claims."

In order to further ensure that the list of witnesses requested under Letters Rogatory did

not impose an undue burden or be unnecessarily cumulative, and to address concerns raised by

the Court that "the burden of the proposed discovery on the government of Colombia is likely to

be great," counsel for plaintiffs across six of the MDL teams jointly decided to narrow the first

round of Letters Rogatory requests to the following 16 witnesses, who were deemed to be essential

to establishing the common elements of Chiquita's liability across all of their bellwether plaintiffs.

Plaintiffs note that the Letters Rogatory require only that the government of Colombia issue the

equivalent of a subpoena for the witnesses to appear for a deposition, so the burden on the

government is minimal. The list below represents Plaintiffs' best effort to narrow this initial round

of depositions while ensuring that they gather sufficient relevant and material evidence to meet the

burden of proof in demonstrating that Defendants' alleged misconduct in financing the AUC

contributed to or facilitated the murders of Plaintiffs' decedents:

1. Raul Emilio Hasbun Mendoza (alias "Pedro Bonito") was a major figure in the AUC
in both Ural* where he, with Chiquita officer Charles Keiser, set up the Papagayo
Convivir, and in Madgalena, where he set up Inversiones Manglar. He has testified in
the Justice and Peace process and in deposition testimony in a California case against
Dole Foods, Inc. about his role as a major financier of the AUC and of his collaboration
directly with Chiquita and Bandadex. He held a very high position in the AUC reporting
directly to the top AUC commander, initially Carlos Castano, then Salvatore Mancuso.
He also worked directly with the AUC's Northern Bloc commander, Rodrigo Tovar
Pupo (alias "Jorge 40"). Hasbun Mendoza thus has highly relevant information about
the payment arrangements between Chiquita and the AUC, the services the AUC
provided to Chiquita, and overall collaboration between the AUC and Chiquita.

2. Dalson Lopez Simanca (alias "Mono Pecoso" or Lazaro") was the leader of a
paramilitary group in the Banana Zone. He was under the command of Herbert Veloza
Garcia (alias "HH"), and Raul Hasbun (alias "Pedro Bonita"). In 1995, under the orders
of Herbert Veloza Garcia and Carlos Castatio Gil, one the heads of the AUC at the time,
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 8 of 14

Dalson Lopez Simanca led a group of paramilitary soldiers to the town of Chigorod6
in Antioquia and conducted a massacre of 18 people at a nightclub called el Aracatazo.
15 of the people killed were known to be part of Sintrainagro, the agricultural workers'
union that represented banana workers at Chiquita's plantations. He carried out
numerous other operations that resulted in the murders of numerous persons, including
Plaintiffs' decedents. Given his participation in these crimes that benefited Chiquita,
Lopez Simanca can provide testimony as to the cooperation between the AUC and
Chiquita.

3. Rafael Emilio Garcia (alias "El Viejo") has personal knowledge of the assistance
provided to the AUC in connection with the murders of Plaintiffs' family members,
which may be used to prove Chiquita's liability for the claims in Plaintiffs' complaint.
Garcia served as the second in command to Raid Emilio Hasbun (a.k.a. "Pedro Bonito").
Garcia was the head of the "Comandos Populares," one of the paramilitary forces
associated with the AUC that operated in the Banana Zone. He participated in many
discussions with the AUC leadership regarding the AUC's agreement with Chiquita
and the services to be performed by the AUC for Chiquita. Among other things, Garcia
personally directed the murders of members of Chiquita's banana workers who were
associated with Sintrainagro, the agricultural workers' union. Garcia has testified
previously that he participated in several meetings with the Castaiio brothers, the
commanders of the AUC at the time, which Plaintiffs' believe were related to the
AUC's agreement with Chiquita.

4. Omar Enrique Martinez Ossias (alias "Maicol" or "Luis" or "El Policia" or "Emilio"
or "El LeOn" or "Tribilin" or "Lugo") has personal knowledge of the assistance
provided to the AUC in connection with the murders of Plaintiffs' family members,
which may be used to prove Chiquita's liability for the claims in Plaintiffs' complaint.
Martinez Ossias was involved in the financing of the William Rivas Front of the AUC,
during the time it was led by Jose Gregorio Mangones Lugo (alias "Carlos Tijeras").
Mangones has previously testified that one of the main functions of the William Rivas
Front was to provide security for the many banana plantations in his territory, including
those producing for Chiquita. Mangones said that 80 to 90 percent of the income for
the William Rivas Front came from the banana companies. Martinez Ossias can
elaborate on the financial relationship between Chiquita and the William Rivas Front,
and the services the AUC provided in exchange.

5. Benito Martinez Bertel (alias "Caiman" or "Cristian" or "Rivera") has personal

knowledge of the assistance provided to the AUC in connection with the murders of
Plaintiffs' family members, which may be used to prove Chiquita's liability for the
claims in Plaintiffs' complaint. Benito Martinez Bertel was part of the "Scorpions,"
an AUC group that operated in the Banana Zone. He was a known associate of Jesus
Albeiro Guisao Arias (alias "el Tigre"), who was also a member of the Scorpions. The
Scorpions group was part of the "Bloque Bananero," a division of the AUC that
controlled Turbo, ApartadO, ChigorodO, Carepa, and part of Mutata, and is known to
have gotten much of their funding from Convivirs set up by the AUC to hide funds
received by the banana companies, including Chiquita. They also received funds
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 9 of 14

directly from the banana companies themselves, including Chiquita. This block also
had close ties to the Colombian Military and police forces. Benito Martinez Bertel was
involved in the murder of Carlos Costal-10 Gil, one of the heads of the AUC, and was
sentenced in 2009 to 26 years in prison for his role in the assassination. He can provide
information about the AUC's leadership structure, as well as its operations on the
ground in the Banana Zone. He can provide information about his group's relationship
with Chiquita and Chiquita's subsidiaries.

6. Bernardo de Jesus Diaz Alegre (alias "El Burro") has personal knowledge of the
assistance provided to the AUC in connection with the murders of Plaintiffs' family
members, which may be used to prove Chiquita's liability for the claims in Plaintiffs'
complaint. Bernardo de Jesus Diaz Alegre was a paramilitary in the "Bloque Elmer
Cardenas." This block, led by Fredy Rendon Herrera (alias "el Aleman"), operated in
the North and West of Antioquia as well as in the province of Choco, along the border
with Panama. The Elmer Cardenas block therefore controlled access to ports on both
the Atlantic and the Pacific. This block was thus highly involved with drug smuggling
and arms trafficking and funneled weapons to other paramilitary blocks. Diaz Alegre
has knowledge of Chiquita's role in these illegal activities that helped to fund and arm
the AUC. He has previously testified before the Justice and Peace Tribunal that he had
connections with the banana plantations around the town of ApartadO, in Antioquia.
These would include Chiquita's plantations.

7. Jesus Albeiro Guisao Arias (alias "El Tigre" or "Brayan") has personal knowledge of
the assistance provided to the AUC in connection with the murders of Plaintiffs' family
members, which may be used to prove Chiquita's liability for the claims in Plaintiffs'
complaint. He was part of the "Scorpions," an AUC group that operated in the Banana
Zone. This group was part of the "Bloque Bananero," a division of the AUC that
controlled Turbo, ApartadO, ChigorodO, Carepa, and part of Mutata., and is known to
have gotten much of their funding from Convivirs set up to hide payments to the AUC
from banana companies, including Chiquita. The group also received funding directly
and from the banana companies themselves, also including Chiquita. This block also
had close ties to the Colombian Military and police forces. Albeiro Guisao Arias was
involved in the murder of Carlos Castailo Gil, one of the heads of the AUC, and was
sentenced in 2009 to 26 years in prison for his role in the assassination. He can provide
information about the AUC's leadership structure, as well as its operations on the
ground in the Banana Zone. He can provide information about his group's relationship
with Chiquita and Chiquita's subsidiaries.

8. Adolfo Enrique Guevara Cantillo (alias "101" or "Alejandro") has personal

knowledge of the assistance provided to the AUC in connection with the murders of
Plaintiffs' family members, which may be used to prove Chiquita's liability for the
claims in Plaintiffs' complaint. Adolfo Enrique Guevara Cantillo was a captain in
Colombia's military and acted as a go-between for Rodrigo Tovar Pupo (alias "Jorge
40"), the head of the Northern Block of the AUC, and high-ranking officers in the
military. He was the head of intelligence for the elite GAULA force in the Magdalena
province until 2004. At the same time, he was Jorge 40's right hand man. He has
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 10 of 14

previously gone on the record as to the connections between the AUC and the military,
even going so far to say that he received orders from Uribe, the then President of
Colombia, to commit assassinations. He also worked in tandem with Jose Gregorio
Mangones Lugo (alias "Carlos Tijeras"), and can testify to their relationship with
Chiquita, payments made by Chiquita, and the services the AUC provided to Chiquita.

9. Carlos Arturo Furnieles Alvarez (alias "El Saiza") has personal knowledge of the
assistance provided to the AUC in connection with the murders of Plaintiffs' family
members, which may be used to prove Chiquita's liability for the claims in Plaintiffs'
complaint. After being in the AUC for several years, Carlos Arturo Furnieles Alvarez
served between 2000 and 2007 as the head of personal security for Fredy Rend6n
Herrera(alias "El Aleman"), the head of the Elmer-Cardenas Block of the AUC. In this
position, he was close to the operations of the Block, and was normally physically
present with Rendon Herrara. As such, Furnieles Alvarez has information about
RendOn Herrera's contacts with Chiquita and was certainly present at meetings between
Chiquita's officers and the heads of the AUC. He also has knowledge of the services
the AUC provided to Chiquita. This witness is uniquely capable of corroborating any
testimony that Mr. Rend& Herrera may give.

10. Efrain Rafael Carbonel Perez (alias "Pin" or "El Pin Carbonell" or "Maicol") has
personal knowledge of the assistance Chiquita provided to the AUC in connection with
the murders of Plaintiffs' family members, which may be used to prove Chiquita's
liability for the claims in Plaintiffs' complaint. Efrain Rafael Carbonel Perez was in
charge of finance and accounting for the William Rivas Front of the Northern Block of
the AUC, led by Jose Gregorio Mangones Lugo (alias "Carlos Tijeras"). Mangones has
previously testified that one of the main functions of the William Rivas Front was to
provide security for the many banana plantations in his territory, including those
producing for Chiquita. Mangones said that 80 to 90 percent of the income for the
William Rivas Front came from the banana companies. Carbonel Perez can elborate on
the financial relationship between Chiquita and the William Rivas Front, and the
services the AUC provided in exchange.

11. Nehemias (or Nemias) Moises Sandoval Becerra (alias "Camilo" or "Franco" or
"Barbas") has personal knowledge of the assistance Chiquita provided to the AUC in
connection with the murders of Plaintiffs' family members, which may be used to prove
Chiquita's liability for the claims in Plaintiffs' complaint. He served as the chief
Lieutenant of Jose Gregorio Mangones Lugo (alias "Carlos Tijeras"), commander of
the William Rivas Front of the Northern Block of the AUC. Sandoval Becerra can thus
corroborate, confirm, and elaborate on the testimony of Mangones Lugo as to the
relationship of the William Rivas Front to Chiquita and the services the AUC provided
to Chiquita. Further, Sandoval Becerra personally was involved in executing numerous
banana workers and residents in the banana zone who were accused of causing
problems for the banana companies.
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 11 of 14

12. Nodier Giraldo Giraldo (alias "El Cabezon") has personal knowledge of the
assistance Chiquita provided to the AUC in connection with the murders of Plaintiffs'
family members, which may be used to prove Chiquita's liability for the claims in
Plaintiffs' complaint. Nodier Giraldo Giraldo is the nephew of Hernan Giraldo Serna,
who was head of the Tayrona Resistance Front (TRF) of the AUC. He was in charge
of finance for the TRF and has previously testified about the payments the TRF
received from Chiquita, and other companies. The TRF operated in the Sierra Nevadas
de Santa Marta, a mountainous area in the Magdalena, Cesar, and La Guajira provinces
roughly between Valledupar and Santa Marta. Under Giraldo Serna's orders, with
knowledge and participation of Giraldo Giraldo, the TRF perpetrated some of the most
brutal massacres of banana workers of the Colombian civil war.

13. Epitasio Antonio Arboleda Velez has personal knowledge of the Convivir payment
system that was used by Chiquita to make payments to the AUC. Arboleda Velez was
the Head of Public Relations for the Convivir Papagayo. Plaintiffs have reason to
believe he may have also had other positions in the organization, including zone
coordinator. The Convivir Papagayo was one of several private security groups, or
"Special Vigilance and Private Security Services," which were registered in Uraba and,
on information and believe, acted as fronts for the AUC paramilitaries. On August 4,
2010, the Vuzgado 2 Penal del Circuito Especializado de Antioquia' (Second Criminal
Court of the Specialized Circuit of Antioquia) found Epitasio Antonio Arboleda Veelez
guilty of aggravated conspiracy in connection with his role in the Convivir Papagayo
and collaboration with the AUC in that role. He was sentenced to 6 years in prison, and
the decision was affirmed on appeal by the 'Sala de Decision Penal del Tribunal
Superior de Antioquia' (Criminal Appeals Chamber of the Superior Court of Antioquia)
on April 17, 2012. On information and belief, the Defendants in this case made
payments to the Convivir Papagayo. Plaintiffs thus have reason to believe that Epitasio
Antonio Arboleda Velez has information about Chiquita's payments to
the Convivir Papagayo, including infolination that is probative of the means that
Chiquita used to hide the nature of its payments and ensure that they were funneled to
the paramilitaries. Plaintiffs also have reason to believe that Epitasio Antonio Arboleda
Velez has relevant information about the relationship between the Convivir Papagayo
and the AUC paramilitaries, as well as the services that Chiquita received, from
the Convivir and/or the AUC, in return for the payments that it made to the Convivir
Papagayo.

14. Arnulfo Pamela Marin has personal knowledge of the Convivir payment system that
was used by Chiquita to make payments to the AUC. Pamela Marin was the director
of the Convivir Papagayo through 1998. Plaintiffs have reason to believe he may have
also had other positions in the organization, including administrative manager and/or
legal representative. The Convivir Papagayo was one of several private security groups,
or "Special Vigilance and Private Security Services", which were registered in Uraba
and, on information and believe, acted as fronts for the AUC paramilitaries. On August
4, 2010, the Vuzgado 2 Penal del Circuit Especializado de Antioquia' (Second
Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit of Antioquia) found Arnulfo Pefluela
Marin guilty of aggravated conspiracy in connection with his role in
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 12 of 14

the Convivir Papagayo and collaboration with the AUC in that role. He was sentenced
to 6 years in prison, and the decision was affirmed on appeal by the 'Sala de Decisi6n
Penal del Tribunal Superior de Antioquia' (Criminal Appeals Chamber of the Superior
Court of Antioquia) on April 17, 2012. On information and belief, the Defendants in
this case made payments to the Convivir Papagayo. Plaintiffs thus have reason to
believe that Arnulfo Peiluela Marin has information about Chiquita's payments to
the Convivir Papagayo, including relevant information about the means that Chiquita
used to hide the nature of its payments and ensure that they were funneled to the
paramilitaries. Plaintiffs also have reason to believe that Pamela Marin has information
that is probative about the relationship between the Convivir Papagayo and the AUC
paramilitaries, as well as the services that Chiquita received, from the Convivir and/or
the AUC, in return for the payments that it made to the Convivir Papagayo.

15. Jaime Alonso Castrillon Echeverria has personal knowledge of the activities of
the Convivir Papagayo, the Convivir La Tagua del Darien, and the Banana Bloc of the
United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC), all of which were active in the regions
of Uraba where the injuries in this case occurred. The Convivir Papagayo and
the Convivir La Tagua del Darien were two of several private security groups, or
"Special Vigilance and Private Security Services", which were registered in Uraba and,
on information and believe, acted as fronts for the AUC paramilitaries. Members of the
AUC Banana Bloc personally undertook many of the wrongful acts alleged in this
complaint. In July 2009, the Vuzgado 2 Penal del Circuito Especializado de Antioquia'
(Second Criminal Court of the Specialized Circuit of Antioquia) found Jaime Alonso
Castrillon Echeverria guilty of aggravated conspiracy in connection with his role in
the Convivir Papagayo and collaboration with the AUC in that role. He was sentenced
to 4 years in prison. On information and belief, the Defendants in this case made
payments to the Convivir Papagayo, the Convivir La Tagua del Darien, and the AUC
Banana Bloc. Plaintiffs have reason to believe that through his role in these two
Convivirs, Castrillon Echeverria has relevant information about the types of payment
arrangements that Chiquita used to hide the nature of its payments and ensure that they
were funneled to the paramilitaries. Plaintiffs also have reason to believe that due to
his participation in both an AUC paramilitary bloc and Convivirs in the Uraba region,
Castrillon Echeverria has information that is probative about the relationship between
the these two Convivirs and the AUC paramilitaries, as well as the services that
Chiquita received, from the Convivirs and/or the AUC, in return for the payments that
it made to the Convivir Papagayo and/or Convivir La Tagua del Darien. Finally, due to
his membership in the Banana Bloc, Plaintiffs have reason to believe that Castrillon
Echeverria may have knowledge regarding that unit's role in the perpetration of the
crimes alleged.

16. Otoniel Segundo Hovos Perez (alias "Cabo Rivera" or "El Ovejo") has personal
knowledge of the activities of both the Elmer Cardenas Bloc of the United Self-Defense
Forces of Colombia (AUC) and of the Convivir La Palma. The Convivir La Palma was
one of several private security groups, or "Special Vigilance and Private Security
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 13 of 14

Services", which were registered in Uraba and, on information and believe, acted as
fronts for the AUC paramilitaries. The Elmer Cardenas Bloc was responsible for some
of the injuries alleged in this complaint. Hoyos Perez was secretary and/or treasurer of
the Convivir La Palma. He was also the commander of the Costafiero Front of the
Elmer Cardenas Bloc, which was active in the regions of Uraba where the injuries in
this case occurred. The witness demobilized as part of that bloc and participated in the
Justice and Peace Process in Colombia. On information and belief, the Defendants in
this case made payments to Convivir organizations in the Uraba region and to the Elmer
Cardenas Bloc. Plaintiffs have reason to believe that through his role in a Convivir,
Hoyos Perez has information about the types of payment arrangements that Chiquita
used to hide the nature of its payments and ensure that they were funneled to the
paramilitaries. Due to his participation in both an AUC paramilitary bloc and
a Convivir in the Uraba region, Plaintiffs have reason to believe Hoyos Perez has
information about the relationship between the AUC paramilitaries and the Convivirs.
Due to his membership in the Elmer Cardenas Bloc, Plaintiffs have reason to believe
that CastrillOn Echeverria may have knowledge regarding that unit's role in the
perpetration of the crimes alleged. Additionally, this witness was also a member of the
aimed groups known as 'los Guelengues' and 'La 70', which were precursor groups to
the Elmer Cardenas Bloc; accordingly, Plaintiffs have reason to believe he has relevant
personal knowledge as to the formation and growth of that bloc.

CONCLUSION

For the foregoing reasons, this Court should grant Plaintiffs' Unopposed Motion to Issue

Requests for Judicial Assistance to the Central Authority for the Hague Evidence Convention of

the Republic of Colombia, for the taking of depositions of the 16 witnesses listed in section B

above. This is the only available process that will allow Plaintiffs to obtain this essential evidence

in preparation for their trials. Plaintiffs will submit to the Court for signature Spanish translations

of the Letters Rogatory for any of the witnesses listed in section B above that are approved by the

Court.
Case 0:08-md-01916-KAM Document 1687 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/28/2017 Page 14 of 14

Dated: November , 2017 Res tfully sub *tted,

Jo caro
F rida r No.: 169440
ear Denney Scarola Barnhart & Shipley,
P
2139 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard
West Palm Beach, Florida 33409
Phone: (561) 686-6300
Fax: (561) 383-9451
Attorneys for Plaintiffs