55 190. The same can be inferred from the provisions contained in the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which establishes that the rights of children require not only that the State should abstain from improperly interfering in the private or family relationships of a child, but also to adopt positive measures to ensure full enjoyment of his/her rights. This requires the State, within its responsibility over the public welfare, to protect the family’s superior role in protecting the child; and to offer assistance to the family by means of public authorities, through the adoption of measures that promote the family unit. 218 191. Finally the Court notes that, within the context of an internal armed conflict, the State’s obligations toward children are defined in Article 4(3) of the Geneva Conventions’ Additional Protocol II. This Article establishes that: “the children will be provided with the care and help they need, and, particularly: […] b) the timely measures to facilitate the reunion of the temporarily separated families will be taken […]”. According to the International Committee of the Red Cross, this obligation has been defined as follows: “the parties to the conflict should do everything possible to reestablish family ties, that is, not only allow the members of the dispersed families to search for their next of kin, but also facilitate this search.” 219 * * * 192. In relation to the right to a name, the Court notes that it has established in its jurisprudence that the “right to a name, recognized in Article 18 of the American Convention, constitutes a basic and indispensable element of each person’s identity.”220 In this regard, the Court has indicated that “the States should guarantee that a person is registered with the name chosen by that person or his/her parents, depending on the time of the registration, without any sort of restriction on the right nor interference with the decision to choose a name. Once the person is registered, their possibility to preserve and reestablish their name and surname should be guaranteed. The names and surnames are essential to formally establish a link between the various members of the family.” 221 193. The European Court also ruled on the matter of the right to a name that “is a means of personal identification and of relation or incorporation to the family, the name of a person affects the family […] life of this person.” 222 194. Based on the foregoing considerations, it is the Court’s role to determine whether the State is responsible for the violations of the right to a name, rights of the family, and rights of the child, to the detriment of Ramiro Osorio Cristales. To this end, the Court reiterates that as of March 9, 1987, when Guatemala recognized the Court’s jurisdiction, Ramiro Osorio Cristales was separated from his family, living under another name and identity, and with a family that was not his own. The separation from his family persisted until 1999, when Ramiro Osorio Cristales reunited with his biological family. Likewise, the name change, based on his 218 Cf. Juridical Condition and Human Rights of the Child. Advisory Opinion OC-17/02, supra note 204, para. 88. 219 Commentary on additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 regarding the protection of the victims of armed conflicto that are not of an international character. Section B. Reunion of Families, para. 4553, Available at http/www.icrc.org. 220 Case of the Girls Yean and Bosico v. Dominican Republic, supra note 204, para. 182. 221 Case of the Girls Yean and Bosico v. Dominican Republic, supra note 204, para. 184. 222 Eur. Court. H.R., Burghartz v. Switzerland, judgment of 22 February 1994, Series A no. 280 – 3, p. 28 para. 24 “[…] Article 8 (art. 8) of the Convention does not contain any explicit provisions on names. As a means of personal identification and of linking to a family, a person’s name none the less concerns his or her private and family life”.