para. 23), the Court will address the arguments on the violation of the right to equal protection and the prohibition of discrimination, as well as the violation of the right to work. VII-I RIGHT TO EQUAL PROTECTION, PROHIBITION OF DISCRIMINATION, AND RIGHT TO WORK A. Arguments of the parties and of the Commission 43. The Commission indicated that disability is one of the reasons for discrimination that is prohibited by articles 1(1) and 24 of the American Convention. It also indicated that one of the immediate obligations with regard to the right to work, protected by Article 26 of the Convention, is the obligation to guarantee its exercise without any discrimination, as well as the obligation to take deliberate steps towards its realization. In this specific case, the Commission noted a series of facts indicating the existence of surreptitious discrimination that arbitrarily impacted Mr. Guevara’s exercise of his right to work. The Commission therefore concluded that Mr. Guevara was not hired by the Ministry of Finance because of his disability, thus amounting to a case of surreptitious discrimination that violated article 24 and 26 of the American Convention, read in conjunction with Article 1(1). 44. The representative reiterated the legal arguments put forth by the Commission in the Report on the Merits. He also presented specific arguments. As regards Article 24 of the Convention, he held that the right to equality was violated in that the reason Mr. Guevara was not selected for the position at the Ministry of Finance was his disability. This was despite the fact that the disability did not prevent him from properly doing his job, and additionally, he received excellent scores during the selection process. As regards Article 26 of the Convention, the representative held that the State had violated its commitment to progressive development by denying a person with a disability has right to work. 45. The state recognized its responsibility for the violation of articles 24 and 26 of the American Convention, read in conjunction with Article 1(1), to the detriment of Mr. Guevara (supra para. 18). B. Considerations of the Court B.1. Right to equal protection and prohibition of discrimination against persons with disabilities 46. The Court has stated that the notion of equality stems directly from the oneness of the human family and is linked to the essential dignity of the individual, and that principle cannot be reconciled with the notion that a given group has the right to privileged treatment because of its perceived superiority; it is equally irreconcilable with that notion to characterize a group as inferior and treat it with hostility or otherwise subject it to discrimination in the enjoyment of rights which are accorded to others not so classified.41 States must abstain from any action that may, in any way, be directly or Cf. Proposed Amendments to the Naturalization Provision of the Constitution of Costa Rica. Advisory Opinion OC-4/84 of January 19, 1984. Series A No. 4, para. 55, and Rights to freedom to organize, collective bargaining, and strike, and their relation to other rights, with a gender perspective. (interpretation and scope 41 14