36 consideration their intrinsic characteristics and the need to foster their development, offering them the necessary conditions to live and develop their aptitudes, taking full advantage of their potential.183 In order to define the content and scope of the obligations assumed by the State in analyzing the rights of children, as it has done on previous occasions, the Court will refer to the international corpus iuris for the protection of the child.184 107. Thus, from the provisions contained the Convention on the Rights of the Child,185which constitutes the corpus iuris for the protection of the child,186 it may be inferred that the State must not only refrain from unduly interfering in the private or family relationships of the child, but must also adopt positive measures to ensure the child’s full exercise and enjoyment of his or her rights.187 This requires the State, in the context of its responsibility for the common good, to safeguard the preponderant role of the family in the protection of the child and to ensure that the public authorities offer assistance to the family through the adoption of measures that promote family unity.188 108. The Court emphasizes that Articles 17 and 19 of the American Convention form part of the non-derogable fundamental rights that cannot be suspended, pursuant to Article 27 of the American Convention. 109. In analyzing and interpreting the scope of the provisions of the American Convention in the instant case, in which the facts occurred in the context of a non-international armed conflict, and in keeping with Article 29 of the American Convention, the Court finds it useful and appropriate, as it has on other occasions,189 to have recourse to other international treaties, such as the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, 190 and in particular, Article 3 common to the four conventions,191 Cf. Juridical Condition and Human Rights of the Child. Advisory Opinion OC-17/02, supra, para. 61, and Rights and Guarantees of Children in the Context of Migration and/or in Need of International Protection. Advisory Opinion OC-21/14, supra, para. 66. 183 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, para. 194, and Case of Fornerón and Daughter v. Argentina, supra, para. 44. 184 El Salvador has been a party to the Convention on the Rights of the Child since July 10, 1990, which entered into force on September 2, 1990, in accordance with Article 49(1). 185 Cf. Case of the “Street Children” (Villagrán Morales et al.) v. Guatemala. Merits, supra, para. 194, and Rights and Guarantees of Children in the Context of Migration and/or in Need of International Protection. Advisory Opinion OC-21/14, supra, para. 57. 186 187 Cf. Articles 7, 8, 9, 11, 16, and 18 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Cf. Case of the Dos Erres Massacres v. Guatemala, supra, para. 190, and Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, supra, para. 107. 188 Cf. Case of the Ituango Massacres v. Colombia. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 1, 2006. Series C No. 148, para. 179, and Case of the Massacres of El Mozote and nearby places v. El Salvador, supra, para. 141. 189 Cf. In particular, the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, approved on August 12, 1949, by the Diplomatic Conference for the Establishment of International Conventions for the Protection of War Victims, held in Geneva from April 21 to August 12, 1949, which entered into force on October 21, 1950, and was ratified by El Salvador on June 17, 1953. 190 Article 3 common to the Geneva Conventions of 1949 establishes the following: “Conflicts not of an international character: In the case of armed conflict not of an international character occurring in the territory of one of the High Contracting Parties, each Party to the conflict shall be bound to apply, as a minimum, the following provisions: 1) Persons taking no active part in the hostilities, including members of armed forces who have laid down their arms and those placed hors de combat by sickness, wounds, detention, or any other cause, shall in all circumstances be treated humanely, without any adverse distinction founded on race, color, religion or faith, sex, birth or wealth, or any other similar criteria. To this end, the following acts are and shall remain prohibited at any time and in any place whatsoever with respect to the abovementioned persons: a) violence to life and person, in particular murder of all kinds, mutilation, cruel treatment and torture; b) the taking of hostages; c) outrages upon personal dignity, in particular, humiliating and degrading treatment; d) the passing of sentences and the carrying out of executions without previous judgment pronounced by a regularly constituted court, affording all the judicial guarantees which are recognized as indispensable by civilized peoples. 2) The wounded and 191