the right to equality and the prohibition of discrimination; c) prevent statelessness; d) be proportional, which requires verification of the legitimacy of the aims pursued and the means used by the authorities, and e) respect the guarantees of due process, providing special guarantees for the protection of children. 131 Regarding the duty to respect due process, this Court holds that any administrative or judicial act that entails loss of nationality must comply with the guarantees enshrined in Article 8 of the Convention, including the following: a) The person concerned must be notified about the start of the proceedings, and the authorities must present the reasons for the loss of nationality; b) Individuals must have the possibility of defending themselves, which includes the existence of a fair hearing and legal advice and, if applicable, translation or interpretation services; c) The act by which loss of nationality is determined must be subject to full review by a higher judicial body, or an independent and impartial body; d) If children or adolescents are involved, their best interests must be considered, and they must be allowed to take part in the proceedings according to their degree of maturity. B.2.2. Analysis of the specific case 98. In the instant case, the Court recalls that Ms. Habbal acquired Argentine nationality on April 4, 1992, after renouncing her original citizenship, in accordance with the resolution issued by Federal Judge Number 2 of Mendoza (supra, para. 32). On May 12, 1992, the Director of the National Population and Immigration Department informed Federal Judge No. 2 of the content of Resolution 1088, leading eventually to the Acting Federal Judge’s ruling on October 27, 1994, confirmed by the Federal Court of Appeals, revoking Ms. Habbal’s citizenship obtained by naturalization and ordering the cancellation of any identity document granted to her as an Argentine citizen. The Court also recalls that Ms. Habbal was the subject of criminal proceedings for allegedly making false statements in the documentation presented in order to obtain residence and citizenship (supra, para. 42). In relation to these matters, on April 14, 1997, the Criminal Court Judge who heard the case concluded that Ms. Habbal was not responsible for the matters investigated, nor was there any evidence against her. Therefore, he dismissed the case against the alleged victim. 99. In relation to the above, firstly, the Court noted that the Criminal Court Judge ruled on the criminal case brought against Ms. Habbal based on the part that Ms. Habbal played in obtaining the police certificate of residence and the option contract for the purchase of a property. The Judge held that “her inability to speak the language is, clearly in this case, an insurmountable barrier to the formulation of any kind of charge against the accused.” Regarding the option contract for the purchase of a property in the province of Mendoza, he noted that the person responsible for those operations was not Ms. Habbal, but her husband, Mr. Al Kassar. Therefore, the judge ruled that Ms. Habbal had no criminal responsibility for the matters investigated, nor was there any evidence against her. Therefore, he ordered a temporary stay of proceedings against Ms. Habbal. 100. The Court notes that the Criminal Court Judge ordered a temporary stay of proceedings against the alleged victim because he concluded that Ms. Habbal was not involved in the processing of the police certificate of residence or the document for the purchase of the property, but not necessarily that the facts used to obtain nationality were true. For this 131 Cf. Written version of the expert opinion of Juan Ignacio Mondelli (evidence file, folios 2451 to 2617). 33