32 109 110 relief. The latter was declared inadmissible by the Court on July 31, 2007. On November 29, 2007, May 27, 2008 and May 21, 2009, the plaintiffs filed new petitions seeking unspecified injunctive relief and alleging new facts. The Political-Administrative Chamber declared the first two petitions inadmissible in 111 decisions dated March 26, 2008 and July 30, 2008, respectively. According to the petitioners’ 112 allegations, which the State has not contested, as of August 2011 no separate case file had been established for the third petition. 103. On October 9, 2007, in an order issued by the Trial Court of the Political-Administrative Chamber, the evidentiary phase of the proceedings got underway. On March 6, 2008, that Court issued 113 its decision on the admissibility of the evidence offered. On May 7 and June 10, 2008, the alleged victims and the State, respectively, filed appeals challenging this most recent decision. On June 19, 2008, the Court agreed to hear the appeals and referred the case files to the Political-Administrative Chamber. Between August 12, 2008 and October 22, 2009, the alleged victims submitted eight petitions asking that the presiding magistrate issue a decision on the appeals. As of August 2011, the petitioners report and 114 the State does not contest that the decision on the appeals had not yet been delivered, which meant that the trial was still in the evidentiary phase. In December of 2011, the contentious administrative writ of nullification was still pending before the Political Administrative Court of the Supreme Tribunal of 115 Justice. Objection to the decisions on the petitions for injunctive relief filed in conjunction with the petition for protection of diffuse and collective interests 104. On May 31, 2007, RCTV, a commercial enterprise, filed an objection to decision No. 957, issued by the Constitutional Chamber on May 25, 2007, within the framework of the petition for protection 116 of collective and diffuse interests (Case No. 07-0731). In its objection, the radio station pointed out that the court had ordered injunctive relief with respect to its assets, even though RCTV was not a party to the proceeding and had not been summoned or notified. It also asserted that the only juridical mechanism through which an organ of the judicial branch can assign the government the right to use private property is the mechanism of prior occupancy, which is part of an expropriation proceeding. No such expropriation proceeding had been instituted against RCTV. It also pointed out that under the court’s decision, if it wanted to appear in the proceedings in response to the public notice inviting interested parties to attend, RCTV could not present its own arguments; the only role it could play would be to support the position of the parties with which it sided. Thus, its right of defense would be violated. The station alleged that the injunctive relief ordered by the court was in violation of the rights to due process, to private property and to defense. It therefore petitioned the Constitutional Chamber to reverse its rulings. 109 Annex 78, Sworn affidavit attesting to the urgency of the Administrative-law Petition seeking nullification (Case No. 070411), filed with the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Court, May 24, 2007, Communication from the petitioners received on February 18, 2010, Attachment 112. 110 Supreme Court, Political-Administrative Chamber, Case No. 07-0411, Decision No. 1,337 of July 31, 2007. Available [in Spanish] at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/spa/Julio/01337-31707-2007-2007-0411.html. 111 Supreme Court, Political-Administrative Chamber, Case No. 07-0411, Decision No. 342 of March 26, 2008. Available [in Spanish] at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/spa/Marzo/00342-26308-2008-2007-0411.html; Supreme Court, PoliticalAdministrative Chamber, Case No. 07-0411, Decision No. 883 of July 30, 2008. Available [in Spanish] at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/spa/Julio/00883-30708-2008-2007-0411.html. 112 Annex 79, Report on the procedural status of the petitions and requests filed by RCTV, July 28, 2011, Communication from the petitioners received on August 5, 2011, Attachment 13. Information not contested by the State. 113 Supreme Court, Political-Administrative Chamber, Case No. 07-0411, Decision No. 107 of March 6, 2008. Available [in Spanish] at: http://www.tsj.gov.ve/decisiones/jspa/Marzo/107-6308-2008-07-411.html. 114 Annex 79, Report on the procedural status of the petitions and requests filed by RCTV, July 28, 2011, Communication from the petitioners received on August 5, 2011, Attachment 13. Information not contested by the State. 115 116 Annex 72, State Communication received on December 4, 2011. Annex 80, RCTV, Objection to the injunctive relief ordered by the Constitutional Chamber in Decision No. 957 delivered on May 25, 2007, filed on May 31, 2007, Communication from the petitioners received on June 16, 2011.