journalists used as evidentiary elements in the indictment. The request was denied on April 21, 2004, on the basis that “it would contribute nothing to the investigation.” 14. They also allege that on April 21, 2004, the Sixth Prosecutor rejected the testimony of Nelson Mezerhane, Nelson Socorro, Yajaira Andueza, Guaicaipuro Lameda, and Leopoldo Baptista, offered by the defense, based on them being referential witnesses whose statements lacked probative value in light of the law in force.12 15. They indicate that on January 27, 2005, the Sixth Provisional Prosecutor filed the indictment against Allan Brewer Carías for the offense of conspiracy to change the Constitution violently by drafting the Carmona Decree.13 They allege that this was based on the allegation by acting Army Colonel Ángel Bellorín, who indicated that “it is a notorious fact repeated and known to all through various means of communication that the authors of that decree are citizens Allan Brewer Carías, …, known … as experts on constitutional matters.…”14 16. They indicate that the proceeding in which the case against Allan Brewer Carías is included was initially assigned to Josefina Gómez Sosa, Temporary Twenty-Fifth Judge of Control. At the request of the Sixth Prosecutor, the Twenty-Fifth Judge of Control decreed the order prohibiting Allan Brewer Carías from leaving the country. That order was appealed to the Tenth Chamber of the Court of Appeals. On January 31, 2005, the Chamber of Appeals issued the revocation of the order prohibiting his exit from the country. On February 3, 2005, the Judicial Commission of the Supreme Court of Justice suspended the judges of the Court of Appeals who voted for the nullity of the decision appealed, as well as Temporary Judge Josefina Gómez Sosa, for not having stated sufficient grounds for the order prohibiting exit from the country. Judge Gómez Sosa was replaced by Judge of Control Manuel Bognanno, also temporary. They allege that he was suspended from his position on June 29, 2005, after notifying the Superior Prosecutor, June 27, 2005, of alleged irregularities in the investigation conducted by the Sixth Prosecutor. 17. On May 4, 2005, the defense asked the Twenty-Fifth Judge of Control to show all the videos, admit the testimony offered, and allow access to the copies of the record. In response the judge ordered the Sixth Prosecutor to allow the defense “total access to the record and the videos that are kept in relation to the case….”15. Nonetheless, he decided that it was not up to him to rule on the relevance of the testimony offered by the defense. On May 16, 2005, the defense appealed to the Court of Appeals the decision of the Twenty-Fifth Judge of control not to rule on the relevance of the testimony offered. 18. They also indicate that the defense also introduced Allan Brewer Carías’s immigration record into the evidence to show that during the weeks prior to April 12, 2002, he was outside the country, and therefore he couldn’t have conspired to violently change the Constitution. They “Of the innumerable items of evidence requested by the defense counsel, almost all have been agreed to, as a result of which it is also false that the petition to produce evidence was ignored, i.e. the statements by NELSON MEZERHANE, NELSON SOCORRO, YAHAIRA ANDUEZA Y LEOPOLDO BAPTISTA, that they seek to have the Public Ministry interview them, so that it may take cognizance of what attorney ALLAN BREWER CARIAS told them, as if the party making the request had not already so informed the representative for the prosecution, and seeking to introduce evidence from referential witnesses that had legal value under the Code of Criminal Procedure (Código de Enjuiciamiento Criminal), accordingly in the view of the Public Ministry the testimony was not and is not necessary for clarifying the facts, and they were informed in writing within the legal time for doing so.” Decision of the Sixth Prosecutor at National Level with Full Jurisdiction of April 21, 2004, in which the request filed by the representatives of Brewer Carias to have Messrs. Nelson Socorro and Leopoldo Baptista subpoenaed to testify that Mr. Allan Brewer Carías’s activities in the days prior to April 10, 2002, were not part of the facts alleged and therefore unnecessary. In a decision of April 21, 2004, issued by that Prosecutor, the Public Ministry decided and ordered that an official note be included in the record requested by the representatives of Allan Brewer Carías on considering that not including said document could constitute a violation of the accused’s right to due process. Original petition received January 24, 2007, paras. 90 and 95-100. 13 Venezuelan Criminal Code, Article 144: “The following shall be punished by imprisonment of 12 to 24 years: … 2. Those who, without the purpose of changing the republican political form that the Nation has given itself, conspire or rise up to violently change the National Constitution.” 14 Complaint filed by Ángel Bellorín on May 22, 2002, Annex 6 to the original petition received January 24, 2007. 15 Twenty-Fifth Judge of Control, official note 25C-482-05, decision of May 11, 2005. Annex 44 to the original petition received January 24, 2007. 12 4