92 D.i. . Abusive use of “nationwide government broadcasts” on April 8 and 9 2002 365. The Commission argued that on April 8 and 9, 2002 RCTV had to transmit the interventions and speeches made in nationwide government broadcasts and in an interspersed manner by different officials and governmental entities, such as the Mayor of the Municipality Libertador of the Capital District, the Minister of Labor, the General in Chief of the Armed Forces, the Minster of Defense, the Minister of Education, the President of Petróleos de Venezuela S.A. (PDVSA), the Governor of the State of Cojedes, the President of FEDEPETROL and representatives of different unions related with the transportation industry, who in use of the prerogative contemplated in Article 192 of the Organic Law on Telecommunications, made those transmissions in nationwide government broadcasts through the different television and radio stations between April 8 and 9, 2002, starting at approximately 14:30 hours, in an uninterrupted and interspersed manner. The Commission also stated the notorious fact of the calling to a strike or general stoppage summoned by the Labor Confederation of Venezuela (C.T.V.), which was publicly supported by Federation of the Chamber of Commerce of Venezuela (Fedecámaras). 366. The representatives stated that RCTV’s schedule was subject to interruptions by the State with its continuous and repetitive “nationwide broadcasts”, ordered in a fragrant violation of the regulations that established the limits to the exercise of that power. 367. With regard to the use of the administrative power called “nationwide government broadcasts”, the State argued that the obligatory transmission of certain information or speeches, which is duly established in the Venezuelan legal codes, cannot threaten or in any way affect the properties belonging to RCTV, since it in no way affects its equipment or installations. Additionally, the State mentioned the need there was to transmit to the population messages that would help avoid the degeneration of the protests into violent events, such as the ones that occurred in April 2002, reason for which it stated that it could not limit the number of hours of the speeches of the President of the Republic or other State officials, but that instead it should be analyzed considering the situation of general interest that had to be presented to the population. The use of these powers, employing all social communication media firms does not constitute, per se a violation of rights, not even when the obligatory transmissions lasted many hours, provided that the circumstances required it. 368. The Court observes that the interventions to the broadcasts of RCTV occurred the day before and during the coup d’etat of April 2002. Regarding the fact argued, an order of April 9th of the Sixth First Instance Civil, Mercantil, and Traffic Court of the Judicial District of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas 348 was presented as evidence. The latter referred to a request from the proxy of the mercantile corporation RCTV so that the court could spread upon the record the number and duration of the interruptions to RCTV’s schedule with the transmissions announced by the Minister of the Secretariat of the Presidency of the Republic along with the national television and radio network and the people intervening in each of the joint transmissions. In that order, the court rules that “the stated facts enjyed such notoriety that no evidence was necessary to consider them as proven,” by virtue of which it denied the request for a visual inspection. 369. It is appropriate to point out that Article 192 of the Organic Law on Telecommunications attributes to the Presidency of the Republic the power to order the transmission of official messages or speeches. 349 348 Cf. order of April 9th of the Sixth First Instance Civil, Mercantile, and Traffic Court of the Judicial District of the Metropolitan Area of Caracas (dossier of evidence, volume VI, folios 1912-1940). 349 In the following terms: “Without detriment of the legal stipulations in security and defense issues, the President of the Republic may, directly or through the National Telecommunication Commission, order the