Blog Subscription via Follow.it

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query frans hals. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query frans hals. Sort by date Show all posts

May 14, 2025

The Bongoking and the brushstroke: How a drug lord’s alleged art deal links a crime syndicate to a stolen masterpiece

In the tangled web of organised crime, illicit art dealings can sometimes serve as both currency and collateral.  The ongoing trial of "Flor B.,"a Belgian national with a shocking criminal resume and a growing reputation as one of Europe's most dangerous narco-traffickers, has taken a dramatic turn into the world of cultural crime.  Dubbed the “Bongoking” in encrypted chat logs, this individual has been linked by prosecutors to the high-profile theft of Two Laughing Boys with a Mug of Beer, a 17th-century masterpiece by Dutch Golden Age painter Frans Hals, stolen on 26 August 2020 from the Hofje van Mevrouw van Aerden Museum in Leerdamhoused on the Kerkstraat.

The first lead on this case came in early 2021, when White Hat cyber-exploit hackers in the European police cracked SKY ECC's EncroChat encryption software, a chat service app that only ran on specially configured Nokia, Google, Apple and BlackBerry phones.  Listening in, the law enforcement officers struck intelligence gold.  By 2023, officers had intercepted some 115 million criminal conversations, by an estimated 60,000 users in which criminals openly negotiated, sometimes in extremely granular detail, money laundering, murders, counterfeiting, drugs, and firearms trafficking.  

In some of these messages and voice recordings, shared both in group chats and one-on-one conversations, members of this drug network coordinated cocaine shipments, talked about their connections with South America drug barons, bragged about violent exploits, and discussed the recent high-profile art theft.

Just two weeks after the museum theft in Leerdam, in messages from the police-cracked app which are now part of trial records, occurred between an individual going by the chat handle Bongoking (Flor B's alleged pseudonym) who discussed the recently filched 17th-century painting, bragging about negotiating a lower purchase price.  

In selected texts released to the public Bongoking writes:

“I recently bought a Frans Hals, 2 laughing boys,” 

“Paid dearly, brother… Asked for 750, settled for 550.” 

Authorities believe this figure represents €550,000, the price the speaker paid for the stolen painting.  He chillingly outlines the painting's purpose in the same chat: not as a collector’s trophy, but as a strategic asset—something to potentially barter for leniency in relation to his wife's role in the criminal's illegal affairs.

“It won’t work for me, brother. But I might still be able to keep my wife out of jail with it, you know,” he wrote, anticipating his own eventual downfall.

He also talked about his construction of a private airport in Equatorial Guinea, used to exploit a shipping loophole which allowed cocaine to flow more easily into the Benelux as part of the kingpin's rapidly expanding criminal enterprise. 

Already a fugitive from justice, the discerning kingpin was in hiding in Switzerland, where for 20 months, he is alleged to have run his international drug cartel from various luxury properties unchallenged.  To do so he used the names Artur Gitta or later Georgios Kandylidis.  His wife for her part became known first as Simone Jung and then as Alexandra Sapranova.  That is until shortly before midnight on 16 February 2022 when both their crime-filled lives caught up with them.   

Following an intensive manhunt, Flor B. and his wife were arrested at a luxury 22nd floor apartment in the exclusive Renaissance residence (Mobimo Tower) in the heart of Zürich West.  The couple's infant son was sleeping in his crib in the next room when law enforcement officers raided the highrise.

Taken into custody, Flor B will be held at the Pöschwies correctional facility for eight months before being extradited to Belgium where he is placed in solitary confinement at Poort van Beveren, a state of the art, high security penal institution while his case in Begium proceeds.  His wife is initially held at the Dielsdorf women's prison in special prison accommodation for offenders with small children.  She will remain there for eight months before being released, and subsequently also extradited to Belgium.  

Flor B's legal team, led by attorney Yehudi Moszkowicz, disputes the prosecution’s interpretation of the messages related to the stolen painting.  Moszkowicz insists his client denies authorship of the incriminating texts and criticises the one-sided nature of the evidence, pointing out the absence of full chat transcripts, as well as the identity of the recipient. “These chats do not show that the sender of the messages actually has access to the painting,” he argued, suggesting the possibility of exaggeration.

But this is far from Flor B’s only serious criminal allegation.  The breakthrough in the SKY ECC cryptophone app exposed this network's trafficking operations, which investigators say revealed the young man as a central figure in a massive European drug empire.  His purported alias Bongoking surfaced repeatedly in communications linked to the importation of more than 16 tons of cocaine, valued at €400 million.  The message also allegedly tie him to violent networks in South America and the Netherlands.  Among the most startling revelations is his alleged orchestration of a drug smuggling scheme using Kriva Rochem, an Antwerp-based water treatment firm that doubled as a front business for cocaine importation.

In closing, the alleged link between Flor B., and his potential connection to the Frans Hals painting is remarkably similar to the thefts of two Van Gogh paintings which ended up in the hands of Camorra-linked mafia boss Raffaele Imperiale.  Likewise last December Stefan Papić, a member of the drug cartel Tito and Dino and considered to be the right-hand man of Flor B was arrested on the basis of a warrant from Belgium.  Papić had opened an art gallery Puro Arte in Breda which is suspected of being used to launder the proceeds of crime.  All three illustrate transnational organised crime figures who are members of massive drug cartels and who dabbled in the world of artistic works with the motivation of using them to launder the proceeds of crime, or use them as collateral or leverage in negotiations, whether in backrooms, on smart phones, or ultimately, in courtrooms during plea deals.

Unfortunately as Flor B's trial continues, the Frans Hals painting remains missing and its fate remains uncertain.  What we do know is that its value is immense not only in monetary terms but as a documented example of how deeply organised crime can entrench itself in the cracks of legitimate society.  Whether hanging in museums or hidded in a drug lord's hideaway, the convergence of fine art and criminal finance continues to challenge the boundaries of law enforcement, and the integrity of the art world itself.

August 28, 2020

When a work of art is particularly popular among thieves. "Two Laughing Boys" has been stolen three times.

On 26 August 2020 the beautiful Hofje van Mevrouw van Aerden Museum in Leerdam, which houses a unique collection of 17th-century paintings, was struck by thieves.  As if three times is the charm, for the third time in a span of thirty-five years, an enterprising thief made his way into the Dutch museum and made off with the same painting.

The culprit(s) entered the museum by forcing open the back door of the museum at around half past 3 in the morning.  This, in turn, triggered the site's security system which automatically notified the local police authorities.  Unfortunately, by the time the dispatched officers arrived on the scene, the art thief was long gone. 

After a sweep of the Hofje van Mevrouw van Aerden with the museum's manager, it was determined that the 1626 painting "Two Laughing Boys" by Dutch Golden Age master Frans Hals was the only work of art taken...again. 

Stolen the first time in 1988 and recovered in 1991.  The Frans Hals artwork depicts two boys, one of whom is glancing longingly into his beer-mug.  The painting was then filched for a second time on 27 April 2011 and recovered on 28 October 2011 after the group of accomplices tried to sell it.  

This week's third theft occurred strategically on the anniversary of the artist's death and makes it the second painting stolen from a Dutch museum this year.  The first being Van Gogh's "Parsonage Garden at Nuenen in Spring" taken from the Singer Laren Museum on Vincent's birthday.

Dutch police are looking for witnesses to the break-in. If you or someone you know has seen or heard anything please contact the police on 0900-8844 or their anonymous tipline at 0800-7000 (free of charge).

January 21, 2020

Five Masters Paintings, representing the GDR's largest art theft are finally coming home, but where they have been for 40 years and who was responsible for stealing them remains a mystery


With their authenticity confirmed, five old masters paintings, "Portrait of an Old Man" from the Rembrandt workshop (probably Ferdinand Bol), "Country Road with Farm Carts and Cows" by Jan Brueghel the Elder, the "Half-length Portrait of an Unknown Man with a Hat and Gloves" by Frans Hals, "Saint Catherine" by Hans Holbein the Elder, and "Self-portrait with Sunflower" by Anthonis van Dyck, will each go back on display in Gotha, Germany, at the end of January.  The artworks were stolen from the Friedenstein Palace exactly four decades ago. .  

Window where thieves accessed the gallery at the Friedenstein Palace in Gotha
Image credit: Mitteldeutscher Rundfunk
The Dutch master works were stolen on a rainy evening between 13-14 December 1979.  During the burglary, which coincided conveniently with the yet untested installation of a new security system, a thief, or thieves, accessed the west wing of the historic palace using some type of crampons, to climb up a rain gutter attached to the side of the building.  

Gaining entry via a second floor window, ten meters up the palace walls, the culprit(s) then are believed to have hand picked specific paintings, (having left other more valuable works behind) and then lowered the paintings back down the side of the building, before descending themselves and making their getaway through Gothaer Park where the baroque palace is located.   By the time the Gotha Volkspolizei (the city's People's Police) were alerted to the theft at 07:10 on the 14 December 1979, the perpetrators and the paintings were long gone. 

But the crime scene is a puzzle.

While exploring the grounds of the palace, the park and the nearby surrounds, detectives found one crampon of the estimated 12-13 that were likely put into service to scale the building.  Made of a steel alloy that was only used in the West, questions abounded as to why the culprits would methodically removed all the other supportive devices, each weighing approximately 5 kilos,  which would have made carrying the 5 paintings all that more difficult. Was this left evidence meant to lead investigators astray by making it appear that the culprits who planned the theft were outside the GDR (German Democratic Republic)?  Likewise, the broken pane of glass in the entry window was broken in such a way as to have made it highly improbable that the thieves would have gained entry by reaching through the hole created.  There were also no scrapings from the paintings frames in the immediate area near the window and the crime scene appeared to mimic three earlier attempts to break into the museum in a very similar fashion. 

Whatever the motivation, the one successful Gotha art robbery resulted in the largest art crime investigations in the history of the GDR.  Yet, despite the involvement of more than 100 detective officers as well as interviews with more than 1,000 people who lived and worked near the scene of the crime and the surveillance of individuals with connections to the Friedenstein Palace nothing was resolved.  Speculation abounded regarding whether the Stasi were involved and if the artworks had been transported to West Berlin via a truck from a nearby slaughterhouse.

Despite the seemingly thorough dragnet, and with little else to go on, the paintings were eventually listed in the loss catalog of the Schloss Friedenstein Foundation, and added to German the Lost Art database, the INTERPOL database of stolen works of art as well as the Art Loss Register.  But despite the widespread attention and extensive police investigations, the greatest art theft in the history of the GDR remained unsolved. 

Fast Forward to 2018

First reported on December 6, 2019. The paintings popped back on the world's radar in July 2018 when a broker, purporting to be acting on behalf of a group of anonymous heirs, contacted the German politician Knut Kreuch, Lord Mayor of Gotha, and then chairman of the Foundation Schloss Friedenstein Gotha.  Hoping to arrange a buyback for €5.25 million, the intermediary presented the mayor with an implausible story of the artworks' acquisition by the persons he represented.  Despite this, he piqued the mayor's interest when, during a meeting at city hall, he backed his story up by laying out a series of colored photographs depicting the front and the back of the paintings.  As all of previous images taken of the artworks were in black and white, this was the first genuine "proof of life" that the paintings still existed and might still be grouped together in spite of the decades that had passed since their original theft. 

While his negotiations continued, the Mayor contacted the Ernst von Siemens Art Foundation. In keeping with the will of that foundation's founder, the Ernst von Siemens Art Foundation, serves as a partner to German museums which promotes acquisitions, restorations and exhibitions, as well as with the the return of confiscated works of art to help making them available to the public.   In the past the Ernst von Siemens Art Foundation had facilitated the successful return of a still life painting by Balthasar van der Ast (1628) that the Suermondt Ludwig Museum in Aachen lost in the post-war turmoil and an ivory tankard from the Castle Museum. 

It should be noted that the Ernst von Siemens Art Foundation never purchases pieces directly from thieves, and in negotiating agreements the Holder has to reveal how they have come to be in possession of the artwork. 

At this point, the EvS began working with the mayor and the holders of the paintings towards an agreement in which the "interim owners" would receive a "moderate allowance or a finder's fee," but if, and only if, the art works of art could be authenticated by the German authorities with the understanding that those who possess purchased goods in good faith (i.e. who don't know that it has been stolen) and that can be reclaimed on the basis of a right in rem (e.g. ownership) of a third party, are afforded protection against claims for return after a 30 year time period.  To date, no information was given publicly as to what the sum of that fee might have been,  and whether or not the fee was delivered. 

After nearly two years of negotiations, on 30 September 2019, the paintings were relinquished voluntarily for authenticity  testing at the Rathgen Research Laboratory at the Staatlichen Museen (State Museums) in Berlin in cooperation with the Berlin State Office of Criminal Investigation.  Meanwhile, while prosecution against the original thief or thieves was time-barred, the Berlin public prosecutor's office began to apply alternative pressure.  

The State Criminal Police Office (LKA) in Berlin, in cooperation with the federal state agencies concerned, opened an investigation into two individuals from Heidelberg and Jena, then aged 54 and 46, on suspicion of extortion. Given their ages, the two suspects, if found culpable, would only have been intermediaries after the fact, as they would have been too young at the time of the original crime to have been directly involved in the art theft.  Search warrants were also executed by the police on 5 December 2019 at the offices and apartments of three witnesses and two suspects including a lawyer from southern Germany and the residence of a doctor from East Frisia, perhaps looking for evidence which could demonstrate direct collaboration between the thieves and any subsequent handlers.  

What can be ascertained is that the handlers, who alleged they had the pictures in their possession, could not rely on a simple defense of having acquired the artworks in good faith.  The theft of these paintings, as well as the Friedenstein Palace as their legitimate owner, were too well known.

The paintings will formally go back on public display at the Friedenstein Palace on Friday. 

By: Lynda Albertson

April 13, 2013

Saturday, April 13, 2013 - , No comments

Rijksmuseum Reopens Today after $480 ten year renovation

Rijksmuseum, Amsterdam (Photo: Telegraph)
Queen Beatrix reopened the Rijksmuseum today amidst fireworks and a queque of people waiting to enter the museum for free after a ten year $480 million renovation designed by Spanish architects Cruz and Ortiz:
The museum covers 800 years of Dutch history through 8,000 objects, distributed through 80 rooms. A one mile (1.5-kilometre) walk around the galleries will take you "from the Middle Ages to Mondrian," the Dutch painter and one of the pioneers of the De Stijl movement in the first half of the 20th century.
But at the heart of the museum's physical and artistic identity is Rembrandt's vast masterpiece of militia intimidation, The Night WatchThe painting, flanked by works by the likes of Johannes Vermeer and Frans Hals, symbolises the Golden Age, roughly spanning the 17th century, when the Dutch dominated much of world trade and, as a result, art.
The renovation Rijksmuseum is also known for a special feature -- the nearby bike path leading out of Vogel Park continues through a tunnel running through the middle of the museum:
The museum didn't want the tunnel used as a bike path because of its proximity to the entrance, but the city authorities decided to let the bikes through and monitor the situation.
The Telegraph published a guide on how to get around the renovated Rijksmuseum.

September 27, 2021

Three convictions and one acquittal, the number of museum thefts Nils Menara, AKA Nils M., has been charged with.


Nils Menara, AKA Nils M., has been sentenced to 8 years in prison by the Lelystad court in the Netherlands for the theft of two artworks:

Vincent Van Gogh's 1882  painting Parish garden in Nuenen stolen from the Singer Laren Museum on 30 March 2020

Dutch Golden Age master Frans Hals' 1626 painting  Two Laughing Boys taken from the Hofje van Mevrouw van Aerden Museum in Leerdam on 26 August 2020.

Neither painting has been recovered.  

Menara was also convicted for possession of a firearm and a large amount of hard drugs and was described by the court as an "incorrigible, calculating criminal".  In making their case, prosecutors had noted Menara's DNA presence at both crime scenes, and one the basis that the modus operandi from both thefts, as well as others in the past. 

The fact that Menara was tripped up by his own DNA is either ironic or just plain stupid, given that in 2009 Dutch police tracked the thief and an accomplice through DNA traces left on a crowbar and bolt cutters, at the scene of a 2009 museum burglary at the Stadsmuseum IJsselstein in the Netherlands.  There, burglars stole six landscape paintings from the 17th and 19th centuries, including works by Jan van Goyen and Willem Roelofs.  In that case Menara was acquitted.  Despite the DNA traces, the judge cited that this evidence alone was insufficient because the tools could also have been touched elsewhere.

Perhaps emboldened by shaking the charges relating to the Stadsmuseum IJsselstein, three years later in 2012 Menara violently entered the Gouda museum using semtex explosives blasting through the museum's front door.   In less than five minutes, he made off with a gilded silver monstrance created in 1662 by Johannes Boogeart which had been on loan to the museum from the parish of St. Anthony of Padua, fleeing the scene on a motorbike.  Adding insult to injury, debris from the explosion pierced a painting by Ferdinand Bol and another work of art.

This time though, Menara's luck didn't hold.  A short while after, Dutch Police tied him to the blowing up an ATM with explosives, which helped them in obtaining a warrant to tap his phone, which gave the police the much-needed evidence which tied him directly to the Gouda Museum burglary.   

In June 2013 the investigation department of the Central Netherlands police, working on the Eiffel investigation into a series of explosions and ram raids at jewellers caught suspects Nils Menara and Erik P., on tape relating to two criminal events, one of which was a conversation about explosives and the other the 2012 Gouda museum theft.  The pair also talked about the Schiphol Airport diamond robbery in 2005, to the great frustration of the police and judicial authorities as the suspects had been previously arrested for this, but then released due to lack of evidence.

Upon his arrest for the Gouda Museum burglary, Menara was found to have heavy weapons, ammunition, money and drugs in his house. 

Thankfully, this time, his charges stick and on 5 February 2016 Menara was sentenced by the court in Utrecht to six years in prison for the robbery at the Gouda museum, two years less than the sentence requested by the Public Prosecution Service. 

In January 2017 seven more suspects were arrested in Amsterdam and Valencia, Spain with the help of a lucky break involving the Menara wiretap.

Despite all this, it appears that Menara's stint in prison hadn't deterred him from a life of crime and for now at least, he remains mum as to who he handed the artworks over to. 

October 22, 2025

Beyond the “Dr. No” Myth: Rethinking Who Steals from Museums like the Louvre and Why

In the 1962 film, "Dr No", James Bond spots the actually stolen
"Portrait of the Duke of Wellington" by Francisco Goya in Dr. No’s lair.

Who Really Steals from Museums?

A question ARCA get's asked often is whether works of art stolen from museums end up with wealthy private collectors for their hidden lairs.

When journalists raise the idea of a “theft-to-order” commissioned by an elusive connoisseur who purchases stolen works to display in secrecy has persisted in popular imagination for decades.  Yet, in practice, this trope has little grounding in criminological reality.  As in many forms of property crime, museum theft is less often the result of grand conspiracy involving a “Dr. No” type figure, than it is about  opportunism and the exploitation of institutional vulnerabilities.  In truth, the motivations and personalities who make up the actors involved in art crime are far more complex, and have little to do with the Hollywood myth. 

Impulsive Crimes of Opportunity

Take, for example, the case of Kempton Bunton, a retired British bus driver, who confessed to stealing Francisco Goya’s Portrait of the Duke of Wellington from London’s National Gallery in 1961. Bunton wasn’t wealthy, nor was he a criminal mastermind.  He was a disgruntled pensioner who objected to public money being spent on expensive art while the poor had to pay for a TV tax, for watching the telly in their home.  The painting spent weeks not in a villain’s lair or secret vault, but behind a wardrobe in Bunton’s modest Newcastle council flat. That incident also made it to the big screen, in a film aptly titles "the Duke,  staring Jim Broadbent and Helen Mirren. 

By contrast, some thefts do arise from explicit financial arrangements.

There are, however, the occasional, 

One infamous "if-you-steal-it-I-will-buy-it" arrangement is the 2010 Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris heist, carried out by French burglar Vjéran Tomic, nicknamed “Spider-Man” for his acrobatic rooftop exploits.  After methodical planning, he broke into the Musée d’Art Moderne de la Ville de Paris under the cover of darkness, gaining entry by manipulating window screws over several nights using acid.  He then entered through the window, sidestepped defective alarms, and absconded with five masterpieces by Pablo Picasso, Henri Matisse, Georges Braque, Amedeo Modigliani, and Joseph Fernand Henri Léger, estimated to be worth over €100 million. 

But Tomic did not act alone in the museum burglary: Jean Michel Corvez, a Parisian art dealer, is believed to have commissioned, or minimally financially incentivised,  the heist.  Corvez provided Tomic with a target list of artists desired by his clients, one of them being a Léger.  Corvez then offered the cat burglar payment once the works had been stolen. 

After the burglary, the paintings passed through a third accomplice, watchmaker Yonathan Birn, who was tasked with storing them, who later claimed to have destroyed them in panic. In February 2017 the trio were convicted.  Tomic received eight years; Corvez seven years, and Birn six. 

This case demonstrates how traditional property crime can intersect with art-market demand structures, transforming theft into a form of illicit commission.

Art crime also intersects with organised criminal economies, where artworks function as negotiable assets.

Right now there is an enormous drug trafficking trial underway in Belgium involving the alleged cocaine kingpin Flor Bressers, nick-named "the finger cutter" who over encrypted messages, told fellow criminals that he purchased the painting "Two Laughing Boys with a Mug of Beer" by Frans Hals (worth millions) for €550,000 in September 2020, hoping to use it's return as a bartering tool with the authorities to keep then-girlfriend out of jail were they to be caught.   That painting was stolen, (for the third time in a span of thirty-five years,) by an enterprising thief from the Hofje Van Aerden museum.  That thief, Nils Menara, was sentenced to eight years in prison for the the theft of the Hal's painting as well as the theft of Vincent Van Gogh's  The Parsonage Garden at Nuenen in Spring.   Only the Van Gogh has been recovered

Earlier, drug trafficking kingpin and Camorra's affiliate Raffaele Imperiale, once one of Italy's most-wanted fugitives, bought two stolen paintings by Vincent Van Gogh taken from the Van Gogh Museum in 2002.  Both were later recovered after the convicted organised crime figure told the authorities were the paintings were. 

Such cases highlight how the symbolic and financial value of art can converge with individuals involved in large transnational organised crime circuits, where cultural property becomes a form of collateral or currency for underworld actors.

Even militias have found stolen art useful.


In January 2005, the Westfries Museum in Hoorn, the Netherlands, lost 24 Dutch Golden Age paintings (and a lot of silver) in a break-in. These artworks were later shopped by suspected members of the Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) militia, connected to the Svoboda (Freedom) party in the Ukraine, who presented a photo of one of the stolen paintings accompanied by a current Ukrainian newspaper as proof-of-life, reportedly asking for 50 million euros for their safe return. In that theft, five of the 24 paintings stolen from the museum were returned to the Netherlands by the Ukrainian authorities more than a decade later, while 19 paintings remain unaccounted for. 

Beyond the Myths

Contrary to popular imagination, there is no single archetype for those who steal from museums or facilitate the illicit circulation of cultural objects. Profiles range from ideologically motivated amateurs and opportunistic insiders to professional thieves, intermediaries, and transnational criminal actors. Their motivations are equally varied—spanning personal grievance, greed, and utilitarian bargaining within broader criminal economies. Each case reflects a unique intersection of opportunity, access, and intent.

As we teach trainees in ARCA’s art crime training programmes, recognising this diversity is essential for scholars and practitioners alike. Simplistic narratives of “master thieves” or “villainous collectors” obscure the complex socio-economic, psychological, and systemic realities behind cultural-property crime.  The study of museum theft, and art theft overall, demands an interdisciplinary approach drawing from criminology, economics, law, and museology, to illuminate how institutional vulnerabilities, market dynamics, and individual motivations converge. 

Only through this kind of nuanced, evidence-based analysis can the field move beyond myth toward an informed understanding of why cultural heritage continues to attract those who exploit it, and those who enable them.

Understanding this spectrum of motivation and examining the methods employed are not simply academic exercises, they are central to developing effective prevention and response strategies.  Dispelling the myths surrounding art crime allows us to see it not as a romantic anomaly or institutional incompetence, but as a complex and evolving form of criminal behaviour that impacts the world’s museums, collections, and cultural identity.

In doing so, we strengthen the intellectual and ethical foundations necessary to protect the shared heritage of humanity.

September 12, 2023

Vincent Van Gogh's stolen painting, The Parsonage Garden at Nuenen in Spring, has been recovered.

After extensive work on the part of the Dutch National Police and a private investigator, authorities have announced that Vincent Van Gogh's “The Parsonage Garden at Nuenen in Spring” was recovered yesterday.  The painting, which is part of the Groninger Museum's collection was stolen on 30 March 2020 while on loan at the Singer Laren museum for its The Mirror of the Soul exhibition. To steal the painting, police indicated that the thief accessed the museum by brazenly smashing his way in through the reinforced glass front door with a sledgehammer. 

Once inside, he had obtained entry through the front door, then moved past the ticket desk and gift shop and smashed open a second locked door, cherry-picking this singular Van Gogh painting and quickly leaving the way he came in, with the artwork tucked under his right arm and carrying the sledgehammer in his left hand.

Long rumoured to be in the hands of the drug underworld, the Van Gogh painting's artnappers had previously tantalised law enforcement authorities by sending a  cheeky "proof of life photo to Arthur Brand, a private art crime investigator based in Amsterdam who's made headlines with a string of high-profile art recoveries.  

The hostage-like photograph, sent to Brand on June 18, 2020 showed Vincent's painting laying flat on a garbage bag, sandwiched between a New York Times newspaper and a Dutch copy of the autobiography "The Master Thief" written by Octave "Okkie" Durham, the thief who stole two other Vincent van Gogh paintings on the evening of 7 December 2002 from the Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam. 

Later, Nils Menara, AKA Nils M., was sentenced to 8 years in prison by the Lelystad court in the Netherlands for the theft of this painting as well as the second theft of Dutch Golden Age master Frans Hals' 1626 painting  Two Laughing Boys taken from the Hofje van Mevrouw van Aerden Museum in Leerdam on 26 August 2020.

During Menara's trial, Prosecutors noted his DNA presence at both crime scenes, and gave convincing testimony which detailed how the criminal underworld has an interest in stolen art as it can be used to demand ransom, or used as a medium of exchange for a penalty or as collateral for drug deals.  Menara was also convicted for possession of a firearm and a large amount of hard drugs and was described by the court as an "incorrigible, calculating criminal".

This week authorities announced that the painting was recovered Monday, after it was dropped off at Arthur Brand's home in Amsterdam, wrapped carefully in bubble wrap and placed in a blue IKEA bag following talks Brand held over the weekend with an informant on the Amstelveld, a square in the middle of the historical centre  in Amsterdam. 


In February 2021 Brand had already indicated that through indirect negotiations, that he had been told that the Van Gogh was in the hands of individuals affiliated with Peter Roy Kok, who was later convicted and is currently serving a 12 year prison sentence in a separate case involving the large-scale import and export of cocaine.  It is believed that the painting was to be used as collateral. 

Richard Bronswijk, head of Art Crime at the police, told Dutch Newspaper De Telegraaf  “The perpetrator is in custody and the job is back. That is a one hundred percent score that we are very happy with. Especially for the Groninger Museum. We have had an excellent collaboration with Arthur Brand.”

During his lifetime Van Gogh only sold one painting.  But when opportunity has knocked, art thieves have often had a preference for his works.  To learn more about the 37 Van Gogh works of art which have been stolen, 3 of them two times each, over the course of 15 separate art thefts, please check out my earlier reporting. 

By:  Lynda Albertson

February 20, 2013

Jonathan Keats' FORGED: Han van Meegeren (1889-1947)



Han van Meegeren's "Supper at Emmaus"
Review excerpt by Catherine Schofield Sezgin, ARCA Blog Editor-in-chief

Forged: Why Fakes Are The Great Art of Our Age
Jonathon Keats
Oxford University Press 2013 ($19.95, 197 pages)

What is Authority? Han van Meegeren (1889-1947)

In Jonathan Keats' book on art forgers, the San Francisco art critic recounts how in 1917 art critics loved Han van Meegeren’s first exhibit of his paintings; however, five years later critics panned van Meegeren’s exhibit of biblical paintings (personally I blame Cézanne for modernism in art).  Keats writes:
Though the gallery found buyers for van Meegeren’s virtuoso depictions of the young Christ teaching in the Temple and the supper at Emmaus, his earnings could hardly compensate for the injury to his reputation.
Van Meegeren would revisit the subjects of these paintings in two pivotal moments of his life.  He created and sold Supper at Emmaus as a Vermeer, then, after accused of collaborating with the Nazis by selling a Dutch masterpiece to Goering, he confessed to his forgeries. Had van Meegeren forged art to mock art experts or did he just want to make more money? After all, Keats writes:
Van Meegeren was well compensated for this work [‘flattering portraits of the upper crust’], generating an income that many avant-garde artists would have envied.  But in the early 20th century, no modern painter could command prices comparable to the old masters.  Picasso earned approximately $5,000 for a major canvas in the ‘20s.  By comparison, The Laughing Cavalier by Frans Hals sold for approximately three times that amount – and it was a counterfeit.  The painter? Han van Meegeren.
The counterfeit Laughing Cavalier was painted in 1922, two years before van Meegeren’s second exhibit met the disdain of art critics and years before he sold five Vermeer paintings. In a 1937 issue of the Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs, Abraham Bredius, the former director of The Hague’s Mauritshuis Museum, praised [van Meegeren’s] the newly discovered Supper at Emmaus as the ‘masterpiece of Johannes Vermeer of Delft.’ Keats writes of van Meegeren’s forgery success:
On the strength of the laudatory text, and the author’s eminence, the Museum Boijmans in Rotterdam acquired the painting for 520,000 guilders – approximately $3.9 million today – and made The Supper at Emmaus the centerpiece of a blockbuster exhibition on the golden age.
Conversation PieceThe Smiling GirlLace Maker, and a Portrait of a Girl with a Blue Bow were four paintings made by van Meegeren and sold as Vermeer paintings.  Art dealer Joseph Duveen sold The Lace Maker and The Smiling Girl to Andrew Mellon.  Keats writes about how the forger fooled the art experts:
In other words, the connoisseurship exploited by van Meegeren was the very basis of Vermeer’s art historical resurrection.  The authority he abused may have been venal and vainglorious – and jealously hostile to scientific verification – but there was no substitute for it.  Gullibility was the underside of open-mindedness.
Keats recounts the van Meegeren’s arrest for collaborating with the Nazis, how he subsequently diverted attention from his work for Hitler to confessing that the paintings allegedly sold to Nazis had been counterfeit Vermeers. He then participated in performance art by spending months in the former Goudstikker Gallery creating another forgery, The Young Christ Teaching in the Temple, to show off his ability. The Dutch public was led to believe that van Meegeren’s forgeries had resisted Nazi authority. The convicted forger died before beginning his prison sentence.  Keats writes:
For the experts and critics, the verdict and consequences were more ambiguous. Conveniently deceased before the trial, Abraham Bredius was universally condemned as a fool, while the few experts who had not been tricked took the opportunity to gloat.  Most noisily, the Duveen agent Edward Fowles publicly released a telegram he’d secretly cable to Joseph Duveen after seeing Emmaus in 1937: PICTURE A ROTTEN FAKE. When the New York Herald Tribune picked up his story, no mention was made of the suspect Vermeers that Duveen had sold Andrew Mellon. 
On the other hand, Dirk Hannema refused to accept that Emmaus was a fake and spent the rest of his life trying to establish its authenticity with funding from Daniël van Beuningen. Though no credible scholars took Hannema’s research seriously and he no longer had an official position at the museum, The Supper at Emmaus remained on exhibit at the Boijmans – with no mention of who’d painted it – until Hannema’s death in 1984.

The unlabeled Emmaus was a fitting tribute for Han van Meegeren, who’d shattered the authority that made him without fostering alternatives.
Van Gogh's Le Blute-fin Windmill and Dirk Hannema (AP)
However, Dirk Hannema's reputation did not end with his misidentification of van Meegeren's Vermeer forgery. Here's a link to a video about the controversial museum director's life in art connoisseurship and collecting (now at the Museum de Fundatie). Hannema spent years claiming that a painting of a windmill he'd purchased for 6,500 francs from a Parisian dealer was by Van Gogh -- and 25 years after his death the Van Gogh Museum authenticated Le Blute-fin Windmill.

The Boijmans exhibited Van Meegeren's Fake Vermeers in 2010.

January 7, 2026

Boris Vervoordt’s TEFAF Appointment Sparks Debate on Leadership, Influence, and Problematic Art

Axel Vervoordt Co is a family-led business.
Boris (left) and Axel (right).Image Credit: TEFAF

In a surprising turn for the international art fair circuit, Dominique Savelkoul  stepped down as Managing Director of the European Fine Art Foundation, (TEFAF), at the end of December in what was described by the foundation this week as "differing views on the strategic direction."  This marks the second leadership change in just over one year at one of the world’s largest fair providers for fine art, antiques, and design, covering 7,000 years of art history.

TEFAF confirmed this week that, Boris Vervoordt, one of the sons of Belgian art and design dealer Axel Vervoordt, and a driving force behind his father's influential Axel Vervoordt Co, has been named chairman since 1 January 2026 and that the fair's executive committee members will each take turns leading the foundation for a period of six months. Vervoordt is the first non-Dutch chairman to steer Europe's prominent art foundation and on paper, brings visibility, experience, and an enviable network of ultra-high-net-worth clients to the foundation's annual New York and Maastricht fairs.  

Well known in the art world for cultivating an enviable black book of high-profile collectors and luxury tastemakers, Vervoordt arrives to TEFAF's management with deep familiarity of the fair’s culture and commercial ecosystem having been a participant from the fairs beginnings. Active in the international world of art, design, and antiques since the late 1960s, the family of Belgian art dealers have sold everything from Egyptian marble bowls, to contemporary Japanese paintings and Le Corbusier armchairs.

In it's current iteration, Axel Vervoordt Co, was founded in Belgium in 2011 (and in Hong Kong in 2014). Their  art gallery, arts and antiques trading organization, interior design and real estate development divisions are headquartered, since 2017, outside Antwerp, at an industrial complex known as Kanaal.  Part gallery, part exhibition space, Vervoordt's showcase institution is housed in a former malting distillery and malting complex built in 1857 on a shipping canal leading to the port of Antwerp, though many Vervoordt-held companies are registered elsewhere. 

Over several decades, Axel and Boris Vervoordts' clients have included Bill Gates, Calvin Klein, Mick Jagger, Givenchy, Calvin Klein, Ralph Lauren and Sting and his wife, Trudie Styler. But their brand extends beyond the art market into interior design, with widely publicised commissions for minimalist fusions of East and West, have been developed for petroleum heiress Betty Gertz in Texas, actor Robert De Niro’s TriBeCa penthouse in New York, and Kanye West and Kim Kardashian's home in the Hidden Hills neighbourhood of Calabasas in California to name a few. 

Vervoordt has also been connected to the interior redesign of a listed villa in Cap d’Ail on the French Riviera associated with shell companies tied to sanctioned 
Russian telecoms oligarch Sergei Nikolaevich Adonev, whose vast financial empire and holding companies have been identified as receiving investment and support from various figures linked to the Kremlin and Vladimir Putin.  These high-end affiliations underscore the breadth of the Vervoordt network, but also highlight the degree to which the family's businesses have profited in proximity to politically exposed or controversial figures.

Rostec boss Sergei Chemezov, Vladimir Putin and multi-millionaire Sergei Adonyev

A Pattern of Troubled Objects

While the Vervoordt name carries clout among the Who's Who in the art world, the family firm can also been linked, in several documented instances, to objects  identified as stolen, looted, or connected to problematic provenance histories, a few of which our outlined here.  Taken individually, these cases reflect the complexities of the art and antiquities market. Viewed together, they reveal a pattern that raises questions about whether Vervoordt's commercial considerations at times superseded rigorous vetting and the ethical stewardship expected in handling the world’s cultural patrimony.

In the 1980s Axel Vervoordt purchased the floor you see in this photo of his library at 's-Gravenwezel castle, the medieval fortress surrounded by 60-hectares of park land he calls home. After the parquet de Versailles floor was restored and published in the October 1986 issue of Architectural Digest, French authorities informed him that the flooring had been stolen from a French château.

Later, in March 1998, at a time when the art world's big players paid little attention to whether an artwork offered for sale could have been stolen during the Second World War, Axel Vervoordt brought the painting Sumptuous Still Life with Lobster, Oysters, Silvergilt Covered Beaker, Silver Mounted Kendi Wine Flask and Glassware by Pieter Gerritsz van Roestraten, (21 April 1630 – 10 July 1700), a Dutch Golden Age painter, apprenticed to Frans Hals to TEFAF's fair at the MECC Exhibition and Convention Center in Maastricht. 

Its provenance, stated:

"Doweswell, circa 1900; A. Schloss Collection, Paris; Private Collection, Belgium"

Remarkably, neither the Vervoordt gallery, nor their buyer raised any eyebrows. 

This despite the fact that the painting is recorded in publicly available wartime asset lists as having been taken during World War II from the renowned Schloss Collection, assembled by Adolphe Schloss—a German-Jewish collector whose family holdings, including more than 300 paintings were seized during the Nazi occupation. Documentation related to the Schloss seizure, including official French postwar recovery reports and international claims lists, identified the still life among the numerous works looted from the Schloss family collection. 

The French Ministry of Foreign Affairs even stated where the then holder of the Van Roestraten painting as: "Private collection, Belgium. Castle of 's-Gravenwezel,  the six-story castle home Axel Vervoordt shares with his wife May in Belgium. Deflecting from its non pristine past, Vervoordt sold the painting at the Maastricht fair along with the silver matching ewer which is depicted in the artist's work.  The painting sold for $800,000 to an unnamed European private collector.

Again, not shying away from World War II sensitivities, in 2011,  Le Monde, art critic and correspondent Philippe Dagen reflected on an exhibition curated by Axel Vervoordt at the Palazzo Fortuny in Venice. He noted that while the inaugural Artempo show had been widely admired, and its successor In-Finitum had leaned heavily into a lavish presentation of works associated with Vervoordt, the Belgian's third installment, TRA, included an absurd work by Cuban artist Tania Bruguera: a heavy iron sculpture emblazoned with the phrase: Arbeit macht frei, translated as "Work makes [one] free." 


Following the rise to power of the the National Socialist German Workers' Party in 1933, this phrase was posted above the entrances of several Nazi concentration camps, including Auschwitz.  According to Dagen, the piece appeared without contextual explanation, leaving visitors to encounter one of the Holocaust's most charged symbols of the twentieth century with no curatorial framing.  This absence of interpretation, he suggested, contributed significantly to the discomfort surrounding the exhibition’s presentation. 

Leaving aside the Second World War, the Vervoordt family has also handled antiquities which can be traced to problematic origins. By 2014 Dr. Morgan Belzic, a leading researcher in conflict antiquities originating from Libya had  identified Vervoordt's firm as having advertised a suspect Greek Hellenistic head (Belzic D.16) which was said to come from a "Private collection F.B., Barcelona, ca. 1970; Private collection, Europe, before 1970." 

Those familiar with Belzic's work on identifying stolen artefacts from Cyrenaica,  the region in North Africa located between Roman Egypt and Tripolitania; today it is part of Libya know that his identifications have lead to restitutions, some of which have been discussed on ARCA's blog.  Often, that same research, in favourable jurisdictions, has resulted in restitutions of cultural property to Libya. Note that the absence of a face, or aprosopy, remains without real parallel in any other location in the rest of the Mediterranean world. Likewise, this object's first appearance in circulation on the international art market coincides with the Second Libyan Civil War (2014–2020), which marked a large uptick in material appearing on the art market from illegal digging around Cyrene, near Shahhat, during the country's instability.

Also in 2014, Vervoordt's firm brought a first century BCE South Arabia (Yemen) alabaster Relief of a Male Figure with Elaborate Hairdo and Horns to TEFAF's Maastrich fair.  For that event, the gallerist listed the object's provenance as: "Ancient collection Belgium, acquired in 1940; Ancient collection M. Abdalla Babeker, Sudan, acquired between 1917 and 1930."

It should be noted that "M. Abdalla Babeker" has been identified as a false-collector name which has come up in provenance records linked to stolen artefacts from Sudan circulated and sold by Jaume Bagot, of J. Bagot Arqueología in Barcelona.  That problematic Catalan dealer, frequently discussed on ARCA's blog, is known for having handled stolen Egyptian shabtis of the Pharaoh Taharqa and Senkamanisken which were illegally exported out of North African country and sold onward in the European ancient art market with this same Babeker provenance.

In 2016 Kayne West visited Vervoordt’s stand at TEFAF in Maastricht ahead of the design firms work on the California mansion he shared with his then-wife Kim Kardashian.  According to U.S. Court documents filed in California, an 11 March 2016 invoice made out by Vervoordt's firm to Noel Roberts Trust, listed the sale of a well worn artefact referred to as "Fragment of Myron Samian Athena."   

This object was seized by US Customs and Border Protection at the Los Angeles/Long Beach Seaport on 15 June 2016 as part of a 40-item shipment weighing more than 5 tons collectively valued at over $745,000.  A form submitted by a customs broker lists the importer and consignee of the items as "Kim Kardashian dba (doing business as) Noel Roberts Trust," an entity linked to Kim Kardashian and Kanye West’s US real estate purchases.

That same Roman sculpture was photographed at Vervoordt's booth in TEFAF by the Italian Carabinieri on 21 March 2011
 as well as next to a second suspect object from Cyrenaica photographed at Vervoordt's  Kanaal exhibition space the following year. 

Nowadays, Vervoordt's family brings fewer pieces of ancient art to their TEFAF fair booth, opts more often than not for contemporary paintings, minimalist furniture and Wabi Sabi artworks, a hat tip to the Japanese philosophy that finds beauty in imperfection.

Even so, the few that have been displayed still come from questionable backgrounds, just far enough removed from their illicit circulation as to make them untouchable by Dutch law.  Take for example this 11th century CE sandstone Khmer Figure of a Male Deity on sale at Vervoordt's Maastrich stand in 2023 or the 13th - 14th century sandstone head of Buddha in Lopburi style the family brought in 2025.  


Both ultimately trace back to decades-old transactions involving a corrupt Chinese-Thai antiquities dealer named Peng Seng, also known as Arthorn Sirikantraporn.  Based in Bangkok, Seng was a well-known supplier of artefacts of murky origins, many transiting through France and the UK.  He was known to have worked closely with indicted dealer Douglas Latchford, (1931–2020), as well as Robert Rousset, (1901-1981), of Compagnie de la Chine et des Indes, the dealer in France both of these pieces were shipped to once purchased for the European market.


A letter, mentioned in the 2019 US Federal indictment against art dealer Douglas Latchford and later reported in an article published by the the Australian Broadcasting Company, describes perfectly, how Seng and Latchford agreed to work together to fabricate provenance so plundered material from southeast Asia could be whitewashed into the licit market in London, clearly circumventing source country  cultural property laws. 

That letter, written by a representative from the auction house Spink & Son, casts doubt on the legitimacy of hundreds of items sourced by Seng in the 60s and 70s and later sold  to private collectors, galleries, and museums around the world. 

It read, in part:

"I would consider my visit there most successful. The financial situation being what it is, I was anxious to spend as little money as possible in purchases and get as many pieces on consignment as possible. I am glad to say it worked out better than I expected."

"I bought a beautiful Baphuon female torso from Peng Seng for $ 13'000, a small, but exquisite Baphuon head from Chai Ma for $ 2'000 and four pieces from Douglas Latchford for $ 20'000. These Bangkok purchases, together with a vase from Mayuyama, $ 8'500, bring the grand total of my purchases on this trip to $ 43'500."

"The greater part of my time in Bangkok was spent in numberous [sic] meetings with our friend Douglas, I am getting the following two important pieces on consignment:(they are supposedly already on their way)."

"Pre Angkor Hari Hara, about 35", supposedly recently excavated in Cambodia near the South Vietnamese border, It is a great piece. The selling price will be $ 300'000 or over, still to be decided upon with Latchford."

"Large Koh Ker female torso; another very beautiful and important piece, selling price $ 100 000 or more, to be determined still."

"Douglas has the following 3 bronzes which at this time he is not ready to give me yet, but which I am sure will come in the very near future."

"I have explored extensively with Peng Seng and Latchford how to get legitimate papers for the large Koh Ker guardian and for all subsequent shipments. The following is the best procedure that I can think of at this time:  For the Koh Ker guardian Peng Seng will send us a letter written and signed somebody in Bangkok. He will say that he has seen this piece in Peng Seng's shop three years ago. Peng Seng would like us to give him the exact text we want in this letter. You and I will discuss this when I am in London."

"On all future shipments of important pieces only, both Peng Seng and Latchford, they will ship the pieces the way they have always done, but at more or less the same time will send a modern piece of about the same size and same subject, described on the airway bill in such a way that nobody will know to which this airway bill applies. From my discussions with Sherman Lee I can say that an airway bill which describes the shipment as a sculpture, rather than "personal belongings", would be satisfactory. It also occurred to me that: we are mostly talking about Khmer art from Cambodia, being shipped out of Thailand, which is not the country of origin, this should lessen our problem."

Peng also communicated in detail with Robert Haines, the David Jones Art Gallery director, explaining to him that he would still send the gallerist plundered Ban Chiang pottery, despite the ban put in place by the Prime Minister of Thailand prohibiting their export in 1972.

Although TEFAF’s vetting committees have, over the years, approved the display of long-looted pieces, links like these, to networks identified in criminal investigations into antiquities trafficking, raise serious questions about the consistency and rigour of the fair’s vetting standards. The fact that an object may now fall outside a statute of limitations does not resolve the ethical concerns surrounding its removal, circulation, or sale. For many observers, TEFAF’s willingness to showcase such works suggests that its vaunted vetting procedures risks becoming a matter of form rather than substance, an institutional gesture that satisfies procedural requirements, making objects "legal now", while sidestepping the deeper moral obligations inherent in stewarding cultural heritage.

Can TEFAF uphold its ethical commitments while being led by someone whose professional history intersects with so many provenance disputes?

The answer to this question matters.  Not only for collectors and curators, but for the broader conversation about accountability in what is circulating on the art market.  TEFAF’s next chapter will be judged not just by the quality of works it presents to its wealthier clientele, but by whether it can maintain integrity and transparency at a time when the global art market should be looking at prior ownership and circulation with more scrutiny. 

One thing is clear. TEFAF’s next Management chapter will be closely watched, not just for what exhibitions and sales it delivers under its new management and oversight, but to observe how its new leadership navigates ethical credibility alongside profit. 

December 31, 2022

ARCA looks back on art and crime in the year 2022

Debris covering stairs inside the Donetsk Academic Regional Drama Theatre following a March 16, 2022, bombing in Mariupol, Ukraine.
Image Credit AP - Alexei Alexandrov

As the year comes to a close, it's time to highlight (some) of the losses, and a few of the successes from the year 2022 before we look ahead to what 2023 will bring.  

In 2022 we witnessed Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine, taking thousands of lives and creating a tragic humanitarian crisis.  One symbol of both heritage and human loss was the airstrike upon the historic Donetsk Academic Regional Drama Theatre in Mariupol, a cultural landmark where hundreds of people had been sheltering as a result of the city's siege.  The theatre strike serves as painful testimony to the cost of war and the painfully permanent scale of destruction to the Ukrainian port city and ints inhabitants, as Russia's primary target in Ukraine's southeastern region of Donbas.  

Evidence collected by the AP estimates that as many as 600 civilians may have died as a result of the theatre's March 16th double airstrike, which placed this cultural institution directly in the crosshairs of the conflict.  This despite the centre's obvious civilian character and the fact that the displaced individuals who sought refuge there had plainly marked the pavement, in front of each entrance to the structure, with the word дети (children), written in Cyrillic and could be seen cooking daily meals outside.  

Five days later and just a few blocks away, Russia's bombardment also heavily damaged the Kuindzhi Art Museum, dedicated to the life and work of local realist painter Arkhip Kuindzhi.  Kuindzhi’s works were not in the museum at that time,  however, the fate of other artworks in the museum remains difficult to ascertain. 

It total UNESCO has documented 64 damaged or destroyed sites of historical and/or artistic interest in the Donetsk Region alone

Elsewhere in the Ukraine, some 400 kilometres away, artworks from the Kherson Fine Arts Museum's collection were stolen between October 30 and November 3 just prior to Russia's forced withdrawal from the city. Photos shared later on Facebook showed dozens of paintings from the plundered museum stacked along a wall inside the  Tsentral'nyy Muzey Tavridy, the Crimean history museum in Simferopol, Crimea. 

As of December 23rd, throughout Ukraine, again according to UNESCO, the agency has verified damage at 102 religious sites, 18 museums, 81 buildings of historical and/or artistic interest, 19 monuments, and 11 libraries.

Outside Ukraine, two themes for 2022 are museums, and those in charge of them, behaving badly, and crime doesn't pay. 

In the US, investigators from the New York District Attorney's Office in Manhattan, issued three separate search warrants on the Metropolitan Museum of Art which resulted in the seizure and return of 27 antiquities to their countries of origin—21 to Italy and 6 to Egypt.  

On the West Coast, the J. Paul Getty Museum in Los Angeles saw its hand forced by the same East Coast prosecutor, following an ongoing criminal investigation by DANY.  That investigation resulted in the California museum relinquishing, post-seizure, its looted group of life-size terracotta figures known as Orpheus and the Sirens back to Italy. 

Things were no quieter for museums over in Europe and the Middle East, where over the summer, France saw its former director of the Musée du Louvre, Jean-Luc Martinez and archaeologist-curator Jean-Francois Charnier formally charged for “complicity“ in having facilitated $50 million in acquisitions of illicit material by the Louvre Abu Dhabi, connected to investigations of suspect antiquities dealers Roben Dib (currently in French custody) and Germany-based dealer Serop Simonian.

As legal investigations usually take several years to unfold in France, Martinez and Charnier have been released under judicial supervision while a ruling of the examining chamber is expected in the new year, which some say, may see these preliminary charges dropped.

Dealers who behaved badly include Inigo Philbrick who received an 84 month prison sentence in May in connection with a multi-year scheme to defraud various collectors and business entities in order to finance his art business.

Eighty year old Raffaele Monticelli, a man considered by various Italian prosecutors to be one of the biggest middle-tier traffickers of archaeological finds in Europe, died in October.  Still active in smuggling illicit material out of Italy, he had only recently returned home to Taranto following the conclusion of a short prison sentence involving a looted helmet in circulation in the Netherlands. 

Also in the Netherlands, the Dutch appeals court confirmed the 8 year prison sentence in July for 59 year old Nils Menara, a professional burglar known on the street as 'Gauwtje' for his role in the thefts of two paintings, The Parsonage Garden at Nuenen in Spring (1884), by Vincent van Gogh, and Two Laughing Boys with a Mug of Beer by Frans Hals.  The two paintings, worth $20 million are still missing. 

In France, the 33rd criminal chamber of the Paris Judicial Tribunal held a decision in October in a case where Egypt requested the restitution of Egyptian antiquities within a criminal proceeding against Didier Wormser, who was accused of dealing stolen cultural property from the Saqqara necropolis. The director of the Star of Ishtar gallery, was given a three-year suspended prison sentence. 

In India, November saw disgraced antiques dealer Subhash Kapoor convicted of burglary and the illegal export of 19 antique idols during his first completed trial to date, held in the town of Kumbakonam in the Indian state of Tamil Nadu.   With more court cases to follow, Kapoor was handed a 10-Year jail sentence for this first conviction.  The judge also imposed sentences on Kapoor's accomplices: Sanjivi Asokan, Marichamy, Packiya Kumar, Sri Ram alias Ulagu and Parthiban. 

In happier news, the last month of the 2022, marked the month where German police successfully recovered 31 of the priceless 18th-century jewellery pieces stolen from  the Royal Palace that houses the historic Green Vault (Gruenes Gewoelbe) in Dresden in 2019.   

Let's hope 2023 is a year of recoveries, more successful prosecutions and an end to conflicts.