From that perspective, notaries acted on behalf of the State but were not public officials; they did not defend the State’s interests because they were not part of the public administration hierarchy, they were not paid by the State, they were not governmentdependent, and the State did not respond for their actions. 50. The State argued that the foregoing indicated that the notarial function was subject to a system of oversight and accountability, based on which notaries could be held responsible in the civil, criminal, administrative and disciplinary sphere if their actions were unlawful and/or unethical. It also argued that, in order to guarantee this system, it was necessary for the notary to have roots in the country, and the “quintessential way to achieve this objective, pursuant to the parameters established by international law, is by nationality.” It indicated that, if the element of nationality were excluded, there was a risk that notaries could act in such a way that it was impossible for them to be held legally accountable for their actions because, in the absence of rootedness in or a close attachment to the country, nothing would prevent them from leaving national territory indefinitely. It also considered that, if they committed an offense and fled to their country of origin, it was possible that the State of which they were a national would refuse to extradite them to Guatemala. It added that, if they abandoned the country with documents deposited with them, this would seriously affect legal certainty and would give rise to the violation of fundamental rights. 51. The State argued that the restriction contained in article 2(1) of the Notarial Code met the requirements of necessity and proportionality because it was the least restrictive measure possible to comply with the objectives sought: safeguard of national sovereignty, guarantee of legal certainty, and protection of human rights. It indicated that, in Guatemala, the notarial system was an open and unrestricted Latin system; therefore, the number of notaries was not limited and it was not necessary to pass a competitive examination to obtain a post of notary. The only requirements for exercising the function throughout national territory were to have obtained the necessary professional qualifications and to be duly registered with the professional association. Regarding the nationality requirement, it argued that article 2(1) of the Notarial Code sought to ensure that the notary had roots in and an attachment to the country; thus, it established that nationality was a requirement in order to authorize the exercise of notarial functions. The State considered that the said restriction was not arbitrary and did not prevent a foreign national from obtaining the professional qualification of notary, taking into account that the Guatemalan Constitution established that there were two types of Guatemalans based on the way nationality was acquired: Guatemalans by birth, and naturalized Guatemalans.49 Consequently, the exercise of notarial functions was not reserved only to Guatemalans by birth. Anyone who wished to exercise notarial functions, and was a national of a country other than Guatemala, was required, in general and objectively, to acquire Guatemalan nationality as an essential requisite to register as a notary, and no additional requirements or obligations were imposed on naturalized Guatemalans. 52. Regarding this specific case, the State considered that Mr. Hendrix had no roots or attachment to the country and, therefore, if it registered him as a notary, he would be accorded an unjustified privilege in relation to all the foreign nationals who had complied with the requirement of naturalization.50 The State concluded that it had guaranteed the 49 Cf. Constitution of Guatemala, articles 144 and 145, supra, according to which Guatemalans by birth are persons born in national territory, the children of a Guatemalan father or mother born abroad, and nationals by birth of the Republics that constitute the Central American Federation. Naturalized Guatemalans are those who do not comply with the foregoing conditions and obtain Guatemalan nationality pursuant to the law. 50 The State indicated that, in Guatemala, according to the General Archive of Protocols, entity responsible for notarial supervision, there are currently: (i) 10 naturalized Guatemalans who have been registered and authorized to exercise notarial functions in Guatemala, placing them on an equal footing with Guatemalans by birth; (ii) 4 notaries who are Spanish nationals and who have obtained the condition of naturalized Guatemalans; (iii) 105 notaries of different nationalities who are Guatemalans by birth by being children of a Guatemalan father or mother, and (iv) 120 notaries who are Guatemalan by birth or because they are nationals by birth of the Republics that constitute the Central American Federation. 15