42 importance during childhood as it is essential for the development of a person, the truth is that the right to identity is not exclusive to children, because it is constantly evolving and the interest of individuals in maintaining their identity and preserving it does not diminish with the passage of time.171 In addition, the right to identity can be affected by numerous situations or contexts that can take place from childhood to adulthood. 114. Evidently, the breach of the right to identity in the circumstances of this case has entailed a complex legal phenomenon that covers a series of illegal acts and violations of rights to conceal them and to prevent the re-establishment of the bond between the abducted children and their families,172 which translate into acts of interference with private life173 as well as violations of the right to a name and to family relationships. 115. In this regard, it is illustrative to recall the opinion of the expert witness Ms. Yáñez that, “[a] central part of Gregoria’s identity is damaged because her name was stolen, but also because her family was stolen and so were her place, her community, her people. She does not know her own roots and this creates a kind of a vacuum, not knowing who she is, but it also prevents her from having a life plan in which she can place herself. She has gone through life asking, who am I, how old am I? She says that, at times, because they made her do adult tasks, she said, maybe I’m older than I am. She could not place herself in her real age or who she looked like. Who do I look like, who am I, what is my surname, what is my name; ultimately, who am I?”174 116. In summary, the Court finds that abducting a child from her family and cultural environment, holding her illegally, subjecting her to acts of violence and sexual abuse, registering her with a different name, changing her personal identification data with false information, and raising her in a different environment, from a cultural, social, religious and linguistic point of view, according to the circumstances, as well as in certain cases keeping knowledge of the family and maintaining close ties; the legacy of customs and traditions from the surroundings and from ones grandparents.” Expert opinion provided by Ana Georgina Ramos de Villalta, supra note 35, (evidence file, volume XI, affidavits, folio 7534). 171 Cf. Inter-American Juridical Committee, Opinion “on the scope of the right to identity,” supra note 168 second operative paragraph. 172 Cf. Case of Gelman, supra note 16, para. 120. Similarly, the United Nations Human Rights Committee, when examining a case of the appropriation of a child, the daughter of people disappeared during the Argentine military dictatorship, indicated that “[her] abduction […],the falsification of her birth certificate and her adoption by S.S. entailed numerous acts of arbitrary and unlawful interference with their privacy and family life, in violation of article 17 of the Covenant [the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights].” H.R.C.. Mónaco de Gallicchio, on her behalf and on behalf of her granddaughter Ximena Vicario v. Argentina, Communication No. 400/1990, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/53/D/400/1990 (1995), View of 27 April 1995, para. 10.4. 173 In this regard, it is important to recall that the Court has determined that, although Article 11 is entitled [Note: in Spanish] “Protection of Honor and Dignity,” its content includes, inter alia, the protection of privacy. Furthermore, it has indicated that privacy is a broad term which cannot be defined exhaustively, but which encompasses, among other protective spheres, the right to establish and develop relationships with other human beings. In other words, privacy includes the way in which the individual sees himself and how and how much he decides to reveal to others. Cf. Case of Rosendo Cantú et al., supra note 137, para. 119, and Case of Fernández Ortega et al., supra note 137, para. 129, citing Eur. Court HR, Case of Niemietz v. Germany (Application no. 13710/88). Judgment of 16 December 1992, para. 29, and Eur. Court HR, Case of Peck, supra note 164, para. 57. 174 Expert opinion provided by María Sol Yáñez de la Cruz before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing held on May 17, 2011. See also Testimony given by Gregoria Herminia Contreras before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing held on May 17, 2011: “it was thanks to Pro-Búsqueda that I found out that my parents were alive, because all that time I had believed them to be dead and, when I found out that they were alive, it gave me so much pleasure because at least I was going to know who I was, what my real name way, how old I was; because I was always treated as “you are already old enough, you have to do this,” and I told them that I could not because I couldn’t wash a large pair of canvas trousers; I told them that I couldn’t; “it’s not that you are old already, it’s just that you didn’t grow”; and they always treated me like this.”