for hired personnel, which tripled during the term of the accused, Congressman Willian Lara.” In particular, it was alleged that Congressman Willian Lara used the Benefits Fund for a different purpose, intentionally breached contractual agreements, and resorted to subterfuge in order to conceal his misappropriation of funds. Specifically, he requested additional credits to replace the funds that he misappropriated, avoided the presentation of accounts during his term, and concealed his actions by closing the bank accounts that the National Assembly has at the Industrial Bank of Venezuela [Banco Industrial] every year during his term, and finally, to complete the commission of his crime, the accused allocated the 2003 budget in advance, adversely affecting the term of the National Assembly’s new board of directors.9 27. According to the information available, the complainants presented the following evidence in this case: i) a September 11, 2001 report on the economic outcome of the collective bargaining agreement that different trade union organizations sought to negotiate with the National Assembly, issued by Miguel Van Der Dijs, the then-Deputy Minister of Institutional Planning and Development; ii) copies of reports released by the Budget Subcommittee of the National Assembly’s Permanent Finance Committee with respect to requests for authorization to transfer budget credits to the National Assembly’s 2002 expenditure budget; iii) copies of the minutes of meetings held in the Office of the Deputy Minister of Labor, Edmeé Betancourt de García, on August 7 and 15, 2001; iv) copies of the minutes of a meeting held at the Ministry of Labor’s Office of the Labor Inspector in the Municipality of Libertador on November 8, 2001, reportedly with the objective of resolving the dispute between the employees and the National Assembly; v) copy of the report of the National Assembly’s Permanent Committee on Comprehensive Social Development, related to the case of the former employees of the defunct Congress of the Republic; vi) memorandum signed on August 17, 2001 from the Internal Comptroller of the National Assembly to the Internal Management Coordinator of the National Assembly, with the attachment “Report on the analysis of transfers and rendering of accounts of the Health Fund,” in which “it is established that the company that administers the health plans owes the National Assembly Bs. 2.6 billion, and that there were duplicate and improper payments totaling Bs. 196,611,808.82”; vii) official letter No. 01-00-001200 issued by the Comptroller General of the Republic, Clodosbaldo Russián; viii) official letter sent to Julián Isaías Rodríguez Díaz, Attorney General of the Republic, by the Internal Comptroller of the National Assembly, stating the need for an investigation to determine responsibilities with respect to the management of the funds related to contracts with the National Assembly’s health company.10 28. The Supreme Court ruled admissible the request for preliminary proceedings filed against Congressman Willian Lara, finding that in cases of crimes involving public property, the interest harmed is the wealth of the State; therefore, the Public Ministry is the only party that has plaintiff’s standing to file a request of this nature. It also found that “based on the supporting documents presented, it is implausible to assert that Willian Lara used the funds in question for any purpose other than meeting the supposed employment obligations with respect to the employees affiliated with the complaining trade union organizations, or the employees of the National Assembly.” First, it is not even credible to assert that the failure to pay the citizens these alleged amounts owed is the result of unlawful acts, when all of the supporting documents presented underscore a labor dispute in which the existence, amount, manner of payment, employee status, and numerous other situations were apparently under discussion. […] In addition, with respect to the offenses allegedly committed by Representative Lara in the administration of the insurance funds, the Court observes that the record does not contain any evidence of responsibility for misappropriation, or intentional or negligent embezzlement on the part of the defendant. The plaintiffs’ arguments on this point would appear to be conjecture based on the potential existence of administrative irregularities and the resulting responsibility of some public servant of the National Assembly, which— according to the case file—have been examined by the Assembly’s Internal Comptroller. However, we cannot 9 Annex 17. Supreme Court. Judgment of April 24, 2003. Available at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/tplen/Abril/AA10-L2003-000028.htm 10 Annex 17. Supreme Court. Judgment of April 24, 2003. Available at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/tplen/Abril/AA10-L2003-000028.htm