39 153. The petitioners claim that before beginning any investigation, prosecutors and police automatically assume that women who are murdered in Guatemala are prostitutes or gang members. As a result of the gender stereotype that agents of the State of both sexes apply and reproduce, the mere fact of being a victim of a violent death puts them in a despised, negative category. Due to this prejudice, they refuse to investigate and close cases virtually without carrying out any inquiries, which is not only a discriminatory and sexist practice, but also against Guatemalan law. The State, for its part says that although it “has come to its attention, through the cases presented to the illustrious Commission, that government employees and officials (though not all of them), make stigmatizing judgments about victims based on their gender, social class, attire, and tattoos,” such actions and comments “are not the position of the State and have not been used in its arguments; they are not institutional conduct or behavior tolerated by the State, given that victims of such unacceptable conduct have the right of recourse to the relevant administrative proceedings before the Office of the Supervisor of Courts (Supervisión de Tribunales) or the Office of the Supervisor General of the Public Prosecution Service (Supervisión General del Ministerio Público) to denounce such misconduct.” It also said that in this case the investigation procedures necessary to find the culprits were still proceeding. 154. Consequently, they are entitled, without discrimination, to equal protection of the law.” Consequently, they are entitled, without discrimination, to equal protection of the law.” As the Court has held in this regard: 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. It is impermissible to subject human beings to differences in treatment that are inconsistent with their unique and 175 congenerous character. 155. provides: As for the obligation of nondiscrimination, Article 1(1) of the American Convention The States Parties to this Convention undertake to respect the rights and freedoms recognized herein and to ensure to all persons subject to their jurisdiction the free and full exercise of those rights and freedoms, without any discrimination for reasons of race, color, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, economic status, birth, or any other social condition. 156. The Convention of Belém do Pará,176 which Guatemala ratified on January 4, 1995, provides that violence against women is “a manifestation of the historically unequal power relations between women and men.” It also observes that the due diligence obligations have special connotations in the case of violence against women. 157. For its part, the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) provides that discrimination against women is defined as “any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex which has the effect or purpose of impairing or nullifying the 175 I/A Court H.R., 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. 176 32 OAS member states have ratified the Convention of Belém do Pará.