47. The determination of suitability tries to verify whether it is reasonable to use the State act analyzed to promote the legitimate objectives sought.68 What is required is a “reasonable connection” between the restrictive measure and the objective sought.69 In other words, the measure should be instrumental to achieve the objective sought or, at least, promote it substantially. According to the Court’s case law, to evaluate the proportionality of a difference in treatment, it is necessary to verify whether there is a well-founded connection between this difference and the objectives of the norm that establishes such distinction,70 and to examine whether the measure pursues an objective that is legitimate71 and essential according to the Convention.72 48. Since it refers to the relationship between the means and the ends, the examination of the suitability – and of the ensuing necessity – cannot be performed in abstract, without empirical information regarding the measures considered and the scope of their effects. Thus, the examination of the suitability of the measures imposed on Mr. Hendrix first requires clarifying the nature of the notarial function as such and the way in which it is exercised in the State of Guatemala. 49. The Latin notary, as Jorge Luis Hellig explains, is an impartial professional with a law degree, a guardian of legality, who enjoys autonomy in his decisions and is independent from the public sector, exercising the following activities: “(a) he advises the parties; (b) interprets the parties’ intentions; (c) drafts, reads and explains the instrument; (d) validates the instrument, thereby granting it recognition by the State; (e) conserves the instrument; (f) replicates the instrument, and (g) occupies his functions for an indefinite period.”73 50. Under the Anglo-Saxon system, for example, the United States of America (with the exception of the state of Luisiana), notaries are appointed as notary public and do not need a law degree because they act exclusively to authenticate and formally validate instruments. Therefore, under the Anglo-Saxon system, notaries do not exercise a public function because they do not intervene in the drafting of the document, or ensure the legality of its content.74 As argued by the International Union of Notaries (UINL), “the intervention of the notary public does not accord legal security because he does not ensure 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 Espinoza Gonzáles v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 20, 2014. Series C No. 289, para. 219; Gender Identity, and Equality and Non-Discrimination with regard to Same-Sex Couples. State Obligations in relation to Change of Name, Gender Identity, and Rights deriving from a relationship between Same-Sex Couples (Interpretation and scope of Articles 1(1), 3, 7, 11(2), 13, 17, 18 and 24, in relation to Article 1, of the American Convention on Human Rights). Advisory Opinion OC-24/17 of November 24, 2017. Series A No. 24, para. 81. 68 69 Cf. BARAK, Aharon. Proportionality: constitutional rights and their limitations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012, p. 303. Cf. Proposed Amendments to the Naturalization Provisions of the Constitution of Costa Rica, Advisory Opinion OC-4/84, January 19, 1984. Series A No. 4, para. 57; Juridical Status and Human Rights of the Child, Advisory Opinion OC-17/02, August 28, 2002. Series A No. 17, para. 47. 70 Cf. Case of Espinoza Gonzáles v. Peru. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 20, 2014. Series C No. 289, para. 219; Case of Guevara Díaz v. Costa Rica. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of June 22, 2022. Series C No. 453, para. 47; Case of the Maya Kaqchikel Indigenous Peoples of Sumpango et al. v. Guatemala. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of October 6, 2021. Series C No. 440, para. 132. 71 72 Cf. Case of I.V. v. Bolivia. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of November 30, 2016. Series C No. 329, para. 241; Case of Pavez Pavez v. Chile. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of February 4, 2022. Series C No. 449, para. 69. 73 Cf. HELLIG, Jorge Ríos. La práctica del derecho notarial. 8. ed. Ciudad de México: McGraw-Hill, 2012, p. 29. Cf. Answering brief of June 14, 2021, para. 36; Amicus curiae brief of the International Union of Notaries (UINL), p. 6. 74 13