88 . those stipulations, these have promised, by virtue of the Convention, to not introduce in their legal systems discriminatory regulations regarding the protection of the law.” 339 349. It is possible that a person be discriminated based on the perception others have of their relationship with a group or social sector, regardless of the fact that this corresponds or not to reality or the victim’s self-identification. Taking into account the statements in the previous chapter (supra paras. 127 through 149), it is possible that the people linked to RCTV be included in the category of “political opinions” included in Article 1(1) of the Convention and be discriminated in certain situations. Therefore, the alleged discriminations de facto must be analyzed under the general obligation of non-discrimination included in Article 1(1) of the Convention,340 in relation to Article 13(1) of the Convention. 350. Taking into account that several of the facts mentioned were analyzed in the previous chapter, or in this one, under the appropriate concepts, the only fact that would have to be analyzed in this section is the alleged order given by a Division General of the Army to have the journalist Anahís Cruz removed from the press conference and prevent her entrance to the headquarters of the Paramaconi Barracks in Maracay, State of Aragua. In this sense, the Court already considered that the evidence provided does not prove that there was a verbal attack against the journalist or a hindrance of access to the official sources of information (supra paras. 230 through 233). Additionally, it cannot be concluded from the evidence provided that the alleged victims had challenged the lack of access to the official sources of information (supra paras. 288 and 289). 351. Based on the aforementioned, this Tribunal considers that the existence of systematic hindrances on access to official sources of information was not proven in this case, nor was a discriminatory treatment by state authorities towards the alleged victims, with a violation to the freedom to seek, receive, and impart information, in the terms of Articles 1(1) and 13(1) of the Convention, in this sense. C) Official letters issued by CONATEL regarding the content of a program broadcasted by RCTV 352. Both the Commission and the representatives argued that during the period between January and the beginning of April of the year 2002, and within a context of threats and harassment against the station and its journalists, the directors of RCTV received official letters issued by CONATEL regarding the content of an informative and opinion program called “La Entrevista en El Observador”, on which some of the alleged victims of the present case worked, and to an alleged non-compliance by RCTV of the legal regulations in force in Venezuela. 353. According to the Commission, the content of the programs that caused the sending of the official letters referred to an informative program where they transmitted images and information related to confrontations between several people and acts of violence that occurred on the street, as well as attacks on social communication workers. Even though 339 Cf. Proposed Amendments of the Naturalization Provisions of the Constitution of Costa Rica. Advisory Opinion OC-4/84 of January 19, 1984. Series A No. 4, para. 54. See also Case of Apitz Barbera et al. (“First Court of Administrative Disputes”) v. Venezuela, supra note 31, para. 209. 340 The difference between both articles lies on the fact that if a State discriminates in the respect or guarantee of a conventional right, it would violate Article 1(1) and the substantive right in question. If on the contrary the discrimination refers to an unequal protection before the domestic legislation, it would violate the stipulations of Article 24 thereof. Cf. Case of Apitz Barbera et al. (“First Court of Administrative Disputes”) v. Venezuela, supra note 31, para. 209. See also, Proposed Amendments of the Naturalization Provisions of the Constitution of Costa Rica. Advisory Opinion OC-4/84, supra note 338, paras. 53 and 54.