charges are based;97 ii) that he was not permitted to appeal certain actions because they were deemed to still be in process,98 and iii) that the evidence that was requested was not gathered regarding the testimony of persons that had knowledge of the facts under investigation.99 Subsequently, on May 23, 2006, Mr. López Mendoza presented evidence,100 which was admitted on June 21, 2006. 101 62. On July 12, 2007, the oral reports were presented before the PoliticalAdministrative Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice.102 Mr. López Mendoza’s representatives and the representation of the Comptroller General of the Republic and of the Public Prosecutor’s Office “presented their arguments” and “established their conclusions” regarding the judicial appeal for annulment filled by the alleged victim. Subsequent to the reading of the arguments and conclusions, the Chamber “ordered they be added to the file.” 103 97 "[I]t is clear that the 'specific and clear manner' to report the facts in order to charge a person-even in the “investigative” phase- is to explicitly state what is the assumption based in the law under which the conduct of the person concerned is subsumed, that is, indicating the infringement for which he or she is charged that under the condified elements of the principle of legality of the faults must be pre-determined by law." Judicial appeal for annulment of the administrative decision of October 4, 2005, presented by Mr. Leopoldo López Mendoza, supra note 96, folio 460. 98 "The fact that [their] has been debate regarding the legal code on whether prior acts are actionable does not lead to the conclusion that such acts can not affect rights. Indeed, such a possibility has been expressly considered by the legislature, to the point that the Organic Law on Administrative Procedures, considering the processing of actions, contemplated the appealability of the actions that infringed the right to defense (Article 85). Judicial appeal for annulment of the administrative decision of October 4, 2005 presented by Mr. Leopoldo López Mendoza, supra note 96, folio 462. 99 They also indicated that "officials of the Comptroller never solicited testimonials from people who had perfect knowledge of the facts under investigation, as evidence in the file itself. They did not even request the testimony of the person who received the donations made by the Association PDVSA to the Civil Association Primero Justicia.” Judicial appeal for annulment of the administrative decision of the State of October 4, 2005 presented by Mr. Leopoldo López Mendoza, supra note 96, folio 465. 100 Said evidence is: i) “The document denominated ‘Social Investment Budget. Results. 1998, drafted in January 1999, which runs to page 1592 and of the brief of the results of the excercise of the investigative power by the C.G.R”; ii) Offer for “Expansion and Consolidation of Justice for Peace in the States of Monagas, Anzoategui, and Delta Amacuro” of 1998, with a follow-up report of October 1999 and other annexes”; iii) “Minutes of the session of March 29, 200[0], held between the representatives and the Inter-American Foundation, Ron Arms and Vicente Valdes, and the representative of PDVSA”; iv) “Official letter of Mireya Vargas, Director of SOCSAL, addressed to PDVSA to put forward short term work plans and visiting plans to the pending requests, to evaluate and carry out the follow-up on the social projects”; v) “Report on the Internal Corporate Budget of PDVSA, denominated Evaluation of Memorandum of Understanding between the InterAmerican Foundation (IAF) and PDVSA 1988-1999”; vi) “Note of Closure of Audit Report of May 22, 2001”; vii) “Authenticated document of donation [of Bs. 60.060.000.00] effectuated by PDVSA”; viii) “original Constitutive Statutes of the Civil Association Primero Justicia […] and Modification and consolidation of said Statutes”; ix) “The ‘Regulations of Conflicts of Interest’ contained in the Manual on Norms and Administration Procedures of Personnel of PDVSA, Head Office,” and x) “simple [c]opy of the judgment N° 940 of June 25, 2003, (Case of Arnaldo León D' Alessandro)”. Cf. Brief without date of consignation of May 23, 2006, by the defense of Mr. Leopoldo López Mendoza (case file of annexes to the answer, tome XXI, annex B, folios 8053 to 8057). 101 Cf. Resolution of June 21, 2006, of the of the Substantiation Court of the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, Case file 2005-5251 (case file of annexes to the answer to the application, tome XXI, annex B, folios 8059 and 8060). 102 Cf. Proof of July 12, 2007, of the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice (case file of annexes to the answer to the application, tome XXI, annex B, folios 8077 to 8170). 103 Proof of July 12, 2007, of the Political-Administrative Chamber of the Supreme Tribunal of Justice, supra note 102, folios 8077 to 8170. 28