38 Ayala Abarca. In addition, the Commission concludes that the State breached its obligation to protect the family enshrined in Article 17 of the American Convention in relation to the obligations established in Article 1(1) of the same instrument to the detriment of José Adrián Rochac Hernández, Santos Ernesto Salinas, Emelinda Lorena Hernández, Manuel Antonio Bonilla, and Ricardo Ayala Abarca, and their family members identified to date, Alfonso Hernández, Sebastián Rochac Hernández, Estanislao Rochac Hernández, Maria Juliana Rochac Hernández, María del Tránsito Rochac Hernández, Ana Margarita Rochac Hernández, Nicolas Alfonso Rochac Hernández, María Adela Iraheta (deceased in 2005), Amparo Salinas, Estela Salinas, Josefina Salinas, Julio Iraheta, Felipe Flores Iraheta, María Adela Hernández, Juan de la Cruz Sánchez (deceased), Joel Alcides Hernández, Valentina Hernández, Santiago Perez, Juan Evangelista, José Cristino Hernández, Eligorio Hernández, Rosa Ofelia Hernández, José de la Paz Bonilla, María de los Ángeles Osorio, Petrolina Abarca Alvarado, José Arístides Bonilla, María Inés Bonilla, María Josefa Rosales, María Esperanza Alvarado, Luis Alberto Alvarado, Ester Ayala Abarca, Paula Alvarado, Daniel Abarca, José Humberto Abarca, Osmín Abarca y Manuel Eugenio Salinas.. 209. As for the petitioners’ allegation with respect to the right to a name established in Article 18 of the American Convention, the Commission is of the view that even though the context described indicates that one common fate of the disappeared children was being stripped of one’s identity through name changes, in the instant case such circumstances have not been established. In this regard, the Commission agrees with the approach of the Inter-American Court in the case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, in which it indicated that “this assumption cannot be applied to establish the violation of the right to a name in all the cases. In this regard, the sole confirmation of the practice of disappearances is 168 not enough, because evidence of the alleged violations is required.” D. The rights to judicial guarantees and judicial protection (Articles 8 and 25 of the Convention) 210. Article 8(1) of the American Convention establishes: Every person has the right to a hearing, with due guarantees and within a reasonable time, by a competent, independent, and impartial tribunal, previously established by law, in the substantiation of any accusation of a criminal nature made against him or for the determination of his rights and obligations of a civil, labor, fiscal, or any other nature. 211. Article 25(1) of the American Convention provides: Everyone has the right to simple and prompt recourse, or any other effective recourse, to a competent court or tribunal for protection against acts that violate his fundamental rights recognized by the constitution or laws of the state concerned or by this Convention, even though such violation may have been committed by persons acting in the course of their official duties. 212. Article 1(1) of the Convention establishes: 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. 168 I/A Court H.R., Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2011 Series C No. 232, para. 118.