social rights, because of the complexities associated with their judicial enforceability, the IACHR has stated that the protection of such rights and access to justice are materialized in the recognition of specific fair trial guarantees, such as equality of arms in proceedings, judicial review of administrative decisions, reasoned decisions, and a reasonable time.107 Specifically on the subject of equality of arms, the IACHR has held that in judicial proceedings for the protection of social rights “the unequal economic or social status of the litigants frequently has the effect of rendering the possibility of defense unequal at trial.”108 In that regard, the InterAmerican Court has held that “the presence of real disadvantages necessitates countervailing measures that help to reduce or eliminate the obstacles and deficiencies that impair or diminish an effective defense of one’s interests.”109 82. In addition, to ensure access to justice, judicial remedies for claiming social rights must be simple, prompt, and effective, as well as offering the possibility to prevent, halt, curb the effects of, and repair the infringement of the infringed human right in situations of stark social inequality. 110 The effectiveness of a remedy must be considered in relation to its possibility of verifying the existence of human rights, of remedying them, of making reparation for the damage done, and of punishing those responsible.111In relation to human rights violations in the context of business activities, the CESCR has said: “States parties must provide appropriate means of redress to aggrieved individuals or groups and ensure corporate accountability,”112 for which it is imperative that remedies be available, effective and expeditious, and that there be access to relevant information for resolving a claim.113 83. At the same time, considering that in this case the rights of a girl are at stake, the Commission considers it necessary to incorporate the international corpus iuris for the protection of children into its analysis of this case.114 The Commission and the Inter-American Court have held that “children are beneficiaries of the rights enshrined in the American Convention, as well as enjoying special protective measures set out in Article 19, which must be interpreted according to the particular circumstances of each case at hand.” 115 Moreover, “the State must pay special attention to the needs and rights of the child, considering [their] particular condition of vulnerability.” 116 In that connection, Article 3.1 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child is relevant;117 it provides: “In all actions concerning children, whether undertaken by public or private social welfare institutions, courts of law, administrative authorities or legislative bodies, the best interests of the child shall be a primary consideration.” Furthermore, in Advisory Opinion OC-17/2002, the Court considered that “while procedural rights and their corollary guarantees apply to all persons, in the case of children exercise of those rights requires, due to the special conditions of minors, that certain specific measures be adopted for them to effectively enjoy those rights and guarantees.”118 107 IACHR, Access to Justice as a Guarantee of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. A Review of the Standards Adopted by the InterAmerican System of Human Rights, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.129, Doc. 4, September 7, 2007, par. 177 and ff. 108 IACHR, Access to Justice as a Guarantee of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. A Review of the Standards Adopted by the InterAmerican System of Human Rights, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.129, Doc. 4, September 7, 2007, par. 188. 109 IACHR, Access to Justice as a Guarantee of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. A Review of the Standards Adopted by the InterAmerican System of Human Rights, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.129, Doc. 4, September 7, 2007, par. 185. 110 IACHR, Access to Justice as a Guarantee of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. A Review of the Standards Adopted by the InterAmerican System of Human Rights, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.129, Doc. 4, September 7, 2007, par. 259. 111 IACHR, Access to Justice as a Guarantee of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights. A Review of the Standards Adopted by the InterAmerican System of Human Rights, OEA/Ser.L/V/II.129, Doc. 4, September 7, 2007, par. 248. 112 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 24, E/C.12/GC/24, 10 August 2017, para. 39. See also, United Nations Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights, Access to Remedy (Principle 25) (2011), available online: http://www.ohchr.org/Documents/Publications/GuidingPrinciplesBusinessHR_EN.pdf 113 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, General Comment No. 24, E/C.12/GC/24, 10 August 2017, paras. 41 and 45. 114 IACHR, Report No. 102/13, Case 12.723, Merits, TGGL, Ecuador, par. 149. Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of Fornerón and daughter v. Argentina, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of April 27, 2012, Series C. No. 242, par. 44; I/A Court H.R., Case of Furlan and Family v. Argentina, Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of August 31, 2012. Series C. No. 246, par. 125. 115 IACHR, Report No. 102/13, Case 12.723, Merits, TGGL, Ecuador, par. 150. Cf. I/A Court H.R., Case of Fornerón and daughter v. Argentina, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of April 27, 2012, Series C No. 242, par. 44; I/A Court H.R.,Case of Gelman v. Uruguay, Merits and Reparations, Judgment of February 24, 2011, Series C No. 221, par. 121. 116 I/A Court H.R., Case of Rosendo Cantú et al. v. Mexico, Preliminary Objection, Merits, Reparations, and Costs, Judgment of August 31, 2010, Series C. No. 216, par. 201. 117 Convention on the Rights of the Child, Resolution 44/25, 20 November 1989. 118 I/A Court H.R., Juridical Condition and Human Rights of the Child, Advisory Opinion OC-17/02 of August 28, 2002. Series A No. 17. par. 98. 18