Guerra and would not deliver the communication of José Vicente Rangel, because Guerra’s case was different as "the old ID he had in his house had been manipulated by a woman who lives there to sign in his name"81. 101. Moreover, on July 16, 2004, Magally Chang Girón declared before the Prosecutor that "I was notified on March 22 this year by Mr. Feijoo Colomine of my dismissal as Personal Assistant of the National Border Council, by instructions of the Council President Dr. José Vicente Rangel Vale, and that the reason was for having signed the presidential recall petition. That's it"82. In the same statement she said that three of the four people who signed the request for a referendum were dismissed, and that the she saw the letter of dismissal of the fourth person, Mr. Jorge Guerra but is unknown to her why he was not dismissed83. 102. For her part, in her testimony before the Prosecutor rendered on July 15, 2004, Thais Coromoto Peña, said that Feijoo Colomine Rincones made a verbal notification to her of the dismissal, and that the Secretary of that person told her that Feijoo "was upset because they were against the President and against the process"84. She also indicated that after being notified of the dismissal "Feijoo Colomine told me to withdraw my signature, that he could send me to Jesse Chacon to do so, to what I replied that I was a woman of self-belief and conscience, that it was my decision and that it will remain that wasy, as I do not have any reason to take it back; then I told him that we shouldn’t talk anymore about it"85. 103. Likewise, in the context of the alleged victims’ amparo proceeding, the transcripts of telephone conversations with two officials to whom they referred in the abovementioned interviews were presented. The Commission has in its power the recordings of these conversations, their relevant contents are detailed below. 104. Below are the transcripts of the relevant parts of the telephone conversation between the then Executive Secretary of the National Border Council Feijoo Colomine and Rocio San Miguel Sosa: FC: One has some limitations, for exercising this, this position of trust. RSM: Mhmm FC: One has limitations RSM: Mhm, Which one? The one to exercise political rights? FC: One can participate and exercise their political rights, of any kind. But you do not, you can not reveal an element of distrust. RSM: But what element of distrust? FC: You cannot expose, because you are signing the petition for the recall of the guy that is paying you and that is hiring you (…)86” 105. With regards to the termination of the contracts with the alleged victims, the recording of the conversation contains the following: FC: Well but, but the, the Government has made a decision. 81 Annex 22. Telephone conversation between Feijoo Colomine and Rocio San Miguel, March 24, 2004, Annex B of Annex IV of the complaint filed before the IACHR on March 7, 2006. 82 Annex 30. Transcript of the interview with Magally Margarita Chang Girón, before the Office of the Thirty-Seventh Prosecuting Attorney on July 16, 2004, Annex II of the complaint filed before the IACHR on March 7, 2006 83 Annex 30. Transcript of the interview with Magally Margarita Chang Girón, before the Office of the Thirty-Seventh Prosecuting Attorney on July 16, 2004, Annex II of the complaint filed before the IACHR on March 7, 2006 84 Annex 31. Transcript of the interview with Thais Coromoto Peña, before the Office of the Thirty-Seventh Prosecuting Attorney on July 15, 2004, Annex II of the complaint filed before the IACHR on March 7, 2006 85 Annex 31. Transcript of the interview with Thais Coromoto Peña, before the Office of the Thirty-Seventh Prosecuting Attorney on July 15, 2004, Annex II of the complaint filed before the IACHR on March 7, 2006 86 See Annex 21. Telephone conversation between Feijoo Colomine and Rocio San Miguel, March 24, 2004, Annex B of Annex IV of the complaint filed before the IACHR on March 7, 2006. 19