end, official notice was reportedly sent to the competent authorities in order for the measure to be entered into the information system and take legal effect. IV. ESTABLISHED FACTS 24. Pursuant to Article 43.1 of its Rules of Procedure (hereinafter the “Rules of Procedure of the IACHR”), the Commission will examine the arguments and evidence presented by the parties, and will take account of information that is a matter of public knowledge,2 including its own reports on the general situation of human rights in Venezuela, publications of non-governmental organizations, laws, decrees, and other regulations in force when the facts at issue in this matter took place. Background 25. The alleged victim Tulio Álvarez, a Venezuelan national, is a lawyer, writer, and university professor.3 At the time of the events, he regularly published opinion columns in the national press. He was also working as a constitutional lawyer. According to what the IACHR was able to verify, the petitioner filed criminal complaints seeking the prosecution of then-President Hugo Chávez Frías and other State authorities during the years prior to the events that gave rise to this case. For instance, in 2002, he filed a criminal complaint and a request for preliminary impeachment hearings against President Chávez for the alleged illegal financing of his election campaign and his political party, Movimiento Quinta República.4 That year, he also requested the nullification of the energy agreement for the supply of oil entered into by Venezuela and Cuba, and brought a criminal action against the former president of Venezuela for these acts.5 It has also been established that the alleged victim requested preliminary impeachment hearings against the Attorney General of the Republic, Julián Isaías Rodríguez Días, for the alleged denial of justice and procedural fraud in relation to the handling of the aforementioned complaints.6 All of these requests were ruled inadmissible by the Venezuelan Supreme Court, on grounds of implausibility. 26. At the time of the events, the petitioner was also the attorney representing an employees’ union of the National Assembly of Venezuela and the Retirees and Pensioners Association of the National Assembly.7 In that capacity, on March 5, 2003, he filed a request before the Plenary of the Supreme Court for preliminary impeachment hearings against the president of the National Assembly, Congressman Willian Lara, for the alleged commission of “Aggravated Misappropriation of Public Funds, Intentional Embezzlement and Negligent Embezzlement,” provided for and punishable under Articles 60, 58, and 59 of the Organic Law to Safeguard Public Assets.8 That request alleged “the use of monies from the benefits fund to make payments and honor commitments totally unrelated to the employees’ rights. The latter allegation concerns payments 2 Article 43.1 of the Rules of Procedure of the IACHR: The Commission shall deliberate on the merits of the case, to which end it shall prepare a report in which it will examine the arguments, the evidence presented by the parties, and the information obtained during hearings and on-site observations. In addition, the Commission may take into account other information that is a matter of public knowledge. 3 Annex 1. Tulio Álvarez´s Curriculum Vitae (CV), included in the enforcement Judgment No.1429-06, Case File No. 7, of July 3, 2006, of the Ninth Trial Court for the Enforcement of Judgments of the Criminal Judicial Circuit for the Caracas Metropolitan Area. Annex to the judgment, pp. 31-33. Communication from the petitioner received on April 12, 2007. 4 Annex 14. Supreme Court. Judgment of September http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/tplen/Septiembre/00-antejuicio-alvarez-vencida.htm 24, 2002. Available at: 5 Annex 15. Supreme Court. Judgment of August 24, 2004. Available at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/scon/Agosto/1802240804-02-0416.htm; Supreme Court. Judgment of November 20, 2002. Available at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/scon/Noviembre/2911-201102-02-0416%20.htm 6 Annex 16. Supreme Court. Judgment of September 24, 2002. Available http://historico.tsj.gob.ve/decisiones/tplen/febrero/ANTEJUICIO%20DE%20M%C3%89RITO%20N%C2%B0%20AA10-L-2002000049.HTM at: 7 In his observations on the merits, the petitioner stated that at that time he was the legal representative in 200 lawsuits filed by employees and retirees of the National Assembly. The State did not dispute that information. 8 Annex 17. Supreme Court. Judgment of April 24, 2003. Available at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/tplen/Abril/AA10-L2003-000028.htm