because they are connected with the exercise of official authority within the meaning of the first paragraph of Article 51 TFEU. (...) under Latvian legislation, the documents or agreements freely signed or entered into by the parties are subject to authentication. They decide themselves, within the limits laid down by law, the extent of their rights and obligations and choose freely the conditions which they wish to be subject to when they produce a document or agreement to the notary for authentication. (...) In that regard, the Court has held that the activity of authentication entrusted to notaries therefore does not, in itself, involve a direct and specific connection with the exercise of official authority (...) (...) Furthermore, nor can the authentication of signatures of citizens as part of the procedure for lodging citizens’ legislative proposals, having regard to the considerations in paragraphs 60 and 61 of the present judgment, be regarded as having a connection with the exercise of official authority. (...) Secondly, with regard to the activities carried out in matters of succession, on the one hand, a notary may proceed to divide the estate only if there is no disagreement between the heirs in that regard and, on the other, that, in the event of disagreement between the heirs, the notary must, under Article 250(5) of the Code of Civil Procedure, place the inventory, valuation and draft instrument dividing the estate before the court. (...) a notary’s powers in divorce matters, which are based entirely on the wishes of the parties and leave the prerogatives of the courts intact in the absence of agreement between the parties, do not have any connection with the exercise of official authority. (...) As regards the argument which the Republic of Latvia derives from the judgment in Colegio de Oficiales de la Marina Mercante Española, (...) it is apparent from paragraph 42 of that judgment that, when the Court ruled that the duties conferred on masters and chief mates of merchant ships flying the Spanish flag constitute participation in the exercise of rights under powers conferred by public law, it was referring to all the duties performed by them, including rights connected to the maintenance of safety and to the exercise of police powers, together with, in appropriate cases, powers of investigation, coercion and punishment, and not merely the authority held by those masters and chief mates in respect of the registration of births, marriages and deaths. In those circumstances, it must be concluded that the activities of notaries as defined in the current state of the Latvian legal system are not connected with the exercise of official authority within the meaning of the first paragraph of Article 51 TFEU.39 68. In sum, pursuant to the comparative jurisprudence and international law described herein, with regard to the notary function, it is observed that: i) they do not function as public officials or servants in the traditional sense; ii) they do not perform functions that “go to the heart of representative government;” iii) they do not have any role in formulating or executing public policies; and iv) they do not have coercive or sanctioning authorities. Also, as likewise noted, the functions of notaries are subject to accountability procedures in the case of irregular acts, and can also be subject to regular knowledge verifications or evaluations to guarantee their technical abilities and proper conduct. 69. Therefore, the Commission concludes that the State did not provide sufficient justification to prove that prohibiting foreigners from exercising the notary profession in Guatemala is a restriction that meets the requirements set forth in the American Convention. As indicated, the State did not make arguments of suitability for the office that would exclude foreign nationals from taking part in order to protect State sovereignty, nor is any such reasoning found in the case file. Likewise, even assuming that the aim of the restriction was to guarantee professionals that are technically proficient and trustworthy in view of the importance of the role of document attestation as an extension of government, the alleged victim passed all the examinations needed to obtain the title of lawyer and notary, demonstrating his technical and professional ability to perform such work on an equal footing with citizens. Additionally, as has been described, the State still has the opportunity to supervise the proper performance and the trustworthiness of those who exercise the notary profession by conducting accountability procedures or regular evaluations, even when these individuals are foreign nationals. In this regard, the State has been unable to demonstrate that the restriction is necessary. Under the circumstances, the Commission finds that there are no grounds to presume that 39 Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber), Matter C-151/14, September 10, 2015. 15