deliberate search for inexistent patterns.166 Such risks are increased, particularly due to the abundant presence of false cognates, as is the case of the concept of the “notary” in the domestic sphere. Thus, when developing arguments, comparative law should be used with great care and methodological rigor, paying attention to the contextual and legal characteristics of what is being compared. 116. Regarding the legal nature of the Guatemalan notary, as the State argued in its answering brief, the notary is not considered to be a public servant or official.167 In Guatemala, the notarial function is exercised as a liberal profession, which is not subject to direct, immediate and continuing dependence on the public administration. As the Commission noted with regard to notaries: (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 authority.”168 117. Thus, the mere citing of the Latin notarial system is not sufficient to substantiate the argument of professional impediment. Even though the system may be the same, in different countries the notarial practice is incompatible with the exercise of other liberal professions, especially that of law. Therefore, in my opinion, the argument of comparative law presented by the State, in the sense that the nationality requirement to exercise the notarial function is a characteristic common to numerous countries under this system, is not the most adequate in this case. 118. It is inherent in the procedural notion of equal opportunities that the skills required in a selection process have a rational connection with the performance of the activities for which the person is selected. Therefore, the first step in an analysis of comparative law is to examine whether the objectives of the activities in each country are similar. It is worth indicating, however, that in many of those States the exercise of the notary profession is incompatible with the exercise of the law – not only in the same cases in which they participate, but in general – contrary to the system in Guatemala, where such occupations are compatible. Argentina169 ARTICLE 7. The exercise of the notarial function is incompatible: d) With the exercise of law, prosecution, or any other liberal profession. Bolivia170 ARTICLE 13. (Incompatibilities). The exercise of the notarial function by notaries vested with the legal authority to attest documents is incompatible with the exercise of law or of any public post or private occupation, with the exception of university teaching, provided there is no incompatibility in the timetable. Brazil171 166 Cf. WATSON, Alan. Legal transplants: an approach to comparative law. 2nd ed. Athens: University of Georgia Press, 1993, p. 10-12. 167 Cf. Answering brief of June 14, 2021, para. 55. 168 Cf. Merits Report (IACHR), para. 68. Cf. Law 12,990 (Argentina). Available at: http://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/anexos/4500049999/45260/texact.htm. Consulted, May 4, 2023. 169 Cf. Law No. 483 (Bolivia). Available at: https://sistemas.mre.gov.br/kitweb/datafiles/SantaCruz/pt-br/file/ lei%20483%20de%2025%20de%20janeiro%20de%202014%20-%20lei%20do%20notoriado%20plurinacional .pdf. Consulted, May 4, 2023. 170 Cf. Law No. 8,935 of November 28, 1994 (Brazil). Available at: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/leis/ l8935.htm. Consulted, May 4, 2023. 171 29