29 a) The Tela Municipal Workers Trade Union 123. At a meeting held on January 15, 1998, the Municipality of Tela decided to transfer to the Tela Municipality Employees and Workers Trade Union (hereinafter “Trade Union” or “Trade Union of the Municipality”) 22.81 manzanas located in the territory claimed by the Community, with a view to executing a “general housing plan, as a social outreach project for all the employees and workers of this 117 118 Municipality.” Said transfer was effected through notarized deed No. 33 of January 22, 1999. Between October 2001 and August 2002, the trade union, for its part, proceeded to grant its members full 119 ownership of various lots within that area, as shown by the notarized deeds in the file. 124. The Community of Triunfo de la Cruz objected to this transfer and filed administrative and judicial actions aimed at recovering the land and obtaining an investigation into the facts. In particular, according to the State, on September 17, 1994 the Community filed a complaint with the Office of the Prosecutor for Ethnic Groups and the Attorney General’s Office decided to close the case as it did not involve any criminal act, arguing as follows: a. The resolution issued by the Municipality of Tela is not considered a crime, because the 22 manzanas of land are not included in the title deed granted to the Garífuna Community, making criminal action impossible. b. The criminal act that the Attorney General’s Office could prosecute is illegal appropriation of property, but that is not feasible because the Tela Municipal Workers Trade Union has title deeds over the contested property. […] the petitioner should have pursued an action to recover property 120 (acción de dominio) with the competent authority for civil law cases. 125. Furthermore, based on information provided by the petitioners, on February 4 1998 Martín Morales Martínez, Deputy Mayor of the Community, filed a complaint for misuse of authority with the Criminal Investigation Bureau, in which he affirmed that the Municipality of Tea had brought 121 machinery into the area without the Community’s knowledge. As regards the administrative actions filed by the Community, the following appear in the dossier with the IACHR: i) Expropriation proceedings with the INA 126. On January 7, 2002, the Community asked the INA to encumber the 22.87 manzanas by 122 means of expropriation. In a ruling dated October 17, 2002, the INA’s Regional Agrarian Office for the Atlantic Shore Zone resolved to suspend the proceedings because it considered that the area claimed by the Community had been transferred by notarized deed granted by the Mayor to the Trade Union and for 117 Annex 42. Certification of Minutes No. 2 of the meetings held by the Municipality of Tela on January 15, 1998. Annex 60 of the initial petition dated October 27, 2003, received by the IACHR on October 29, 2003. 118 Annex 16. Notarized deed No. 33 dated January 22, 1999. File 57426 with the National Agrarian Institute, pp. 486 to 489. Appendix 8 of the petitioner’s written communication of May 23, 2006, received by the IACHR on May 30, 2006. 119 Annex 16. Notarized deeds granted by the President of the Trade Union of Tela to its members. File relating to application No. 57426 submitted to the National Agrarian Institute, pp. 219 - 460. Annex B to the State's writ containing its observations on the merits, dated March 8, 2007, received by the IACHR on March 9, 2007. 120 Written communication containing the State's observations on the merits, dated March 8, 2007, received by the IACHR on March 9, 2007. 121 Specifically, he stated that: “on January 23, 1998 the Municipality brought in a machine to work on a piece of land belonging to the Garifuna community in that sector, without consulting with the community authorities. Apparently, they intend to make a settlement there. We wanted to talk to the Mayor but couldn't. And we have legitimate papers showing that this land belongs to us. Little by little, with actions like these. they are going to leave us with very little land. That is not fair." Annex 43. Complaint made by Martín Morales Martínez on January 23, 1998. Annex 61 of the initial petition dated October 27, 2003, received by the IACHR on October 29, 2003. 122 Annex 16. Request for appropriation of 22 manzanasvia expropriation in favor of the Triunfo de la Cruz community, dated January 7, 2002. File relating to application No. 57426 with the National Agrarian Institute, pp. 162 - 163. Annex B to the State's writ containing its observations on the merits, dated March 8, 2007, received by the IACHR on March 9, 2007.