treatment that violates the right to equality because this is the central issue of the case brought before the Court. 5. In this regard, first, it should be recalled that, in the case of foreign nationals, it cannot be considered that every difference in treatment by the State constitutes discrimination. As this Court has established, a difference in treatment is considered discriminatory when it has no reasonable and objective justification; that is, when it does not seek a legitimate objective and when there is no proportionality between the means used and the end sought. 3 In other words, in the instant case, in order to determine whether the restriction of the exercise of the notarial profession by a foreign national who has not acquired Guatemalan nationality is compatible with the American Convention and the relevant standards established by this Court, we must examine its legality and its objective, and also the suitability, necessity and proportionality of the requirement. 6. Regarding the first aspect – namely, that the restriction be established by law – it should be recalled that article 2(1) of the Notarial Code establishes that, to exercise the notarial function, it is necessary to be Guatemalan by birth, at least 18 years of age, a lay person, and domiciled in the Republic. Regarding the expression “Guatemalan by birth,” the Constitutional Court interpreted article 2(1) of the Notarial Code in relation to article 146 of the Guatemalan Constitution, and therefore modified the literal text of the said norm and determined that the allusion to “a Guatemalan by birth” should be understood as “by birth and/or naturalized.” 4 7. We must now ask ourselves what objective the State was seeking when imposing the restriction and whether or not it was compatible with the provisions of the Convention. 5 In this regard, the objective alleged by the State of ensuring that notaries had roots in, or an attachment to, the country in order to guarantee the principle of accountability is legitimate. Indeed, those who exercise the notarial function in Guatemala perform a public function; they are auxiliaries of the administration of justice in non-contentious matters, and they are subject to the principle of accountability by means of permanent oversight by their professional association. Thus, the restriction has an objective that falls within the general interest and, therefore, does not contravene the Convention. Also, as indicated by expert witness Orellana during the public hearing, the nationality requirement seeks to enhance the independence of the exercise of the notarial profession, which is not met merely by the requirement of roots. 6 Thus, roots alone do 3 Cf. Case of Norín Catrimán et al. (Leaders, Members and Activist of the Mapuche Indigenous People) v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 29, 2014. Series C No. 279, para. 200; Case of Flor Freire v. Ecuador. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of August 31, 2016. Series C No. 315, para. 125, and Case of Guevara Díaz v. Costa Rica. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 22, 2022. Series C No. 453, para. 49. 4 Cf. Expert opinion of Gabriel Orellana Rojas provided to the Court during a virtual hearing held on March 28, 2022. Article 30 of the Convention: “The restrictions that, pursuant to this Convention, may be placed on the enjoyment or exercise of the rights or freedoms recognized herein may not be applied except in accordance with laws enacted for reasons of general interest and in accordance with the purpose for which such restrictions have been established.” 5 6 In this regard, during the public hearing expert witness Orellana stated that: Therefore, the problem I see here is that, under the Latin notarial system, the notary must be independent in his criteria and in his actions. A foreign notary, for example, a United State notary, could, under certain circumstances, find himself bound by decisions taken by the State Department, by the FAC bureau or any other bureau of the United States that, at a certain moment, classifies certain Guatemalans as unable to enter into legal or commercial relations, transactions and operations with United States citizens. In that case, at a certain moment, this United States notary, who is working and exercising his profession in Guatemala ceases to have the most essential characteristics for a Latin notary, which is his independence, because he will no longer obey his own conscience, or his own 2