of the American Convention, were violated to the detriment of Sebastián Claus Furlán. E) Other judicial guarantees 224. In this chapter, the Court will consider the arguments presented by the parties and the Inter-American Commission regarding: i) the right to be heard of Sebastián Furlan, and ii) the lack of participation of the Juvenile Defender’s Office [Asesoría de Menores] in the civil lawsuit for damages. E.1. Right to be heard Arguments of the parties and of the Inter-American Commission 225. The Commission indicated that “the international corpus juris related to minors, as well as to persons with disabilities, is clear about the rules of special protection in judicial proceedings in which minors with disabilities are involved and [, in particular], it emphasized the guiding principles of the best interests of the child and the right to be heard". 226. For their part, the representatives alleged that during the “judicial processing of the suit for damages […] the intervening judges did not guarantee [the] right to be heard [of Sebastián Furlán], either on his own behalf or through his representatives, when he was an adolescent, as well as after he reached 21 years of age" Specifically, the representatives asserted that Sebastián Furlán “was never properly heard by the intervening judges nor by the Juvenile Defender’s Office.” They further alleged that “[t]he importance of the judge’s personal interview with a child is even greater when there is another cause of vulnerability in the child, namely his disability.” 227. The State pointed out that Sebastián Furlan “was represented by his father Danilo Furlan and assisted by a legal counsel of his choice.” It added that this “implies that the young man acted in the judicial process and was heard through his representative in compliance with the provisions of the American Convention and the Convention on the Rights of the Child”. Likewise, it indicated that “the briefs presented by Sebastián Furlan with legal assistance were received and provided by the judge in the case, and therefore, at no time was he denied the right to be heard.” Considerations of the Court 228. The Court reiterates that Article 8(1) of the American Convention protects the right of every person to be heard, including minors, in the determination of his or her rights. Said right must be interpreted in light of Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child,368 which contains adequate provisions on the right of children to be heard, with the aim of ensuring that their intervention is appropriate to their situation and is not detrimental 368 Article 12 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child states: 1. States Parties shall assure to the child who is capable of forming his or her own views the right to express those views freely in all matters affecting the child, the views of the child being given due weight in accordance with the age and maturity of the child. 2. For this purpose, the child shall in particular be provided the opportunity to be heard in any judicial and administrative proceedings affecting the child, either directly, or through a representative or an appropriate body, in a manner consistent with the procedural rules of national law. (underlining added). 72