Committee on the Rights of the Child.223 The Inter-American Commission has also highlighted the importance of the United Nations Guidelines for the Alternative Care of Children.224 127. Children are thus safeguarded by a corpus juris which provides for both the principle of the best interests of the child and special measures of protection, which must be defined on the basis of the specific circumstances of each concrete case.225 The Court has remarked that the adoption of special measures pertains to both the State and the family, community, and society to which the child belongs.226 i) Best interests of the child principle 128. Article 3.1 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child provides for the following: 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. 129. The United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child has stressed that the best interests of the child principle is the "general guiding principle for interpreting and implementing all the provisions of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.”227 Likewise, the Court has pointed out that the best interests of the child principle is the cornerstone governing the regulatory framework for the rights of the child228 and that it is based on the very dignity of the human being, on the characteristics that are inherent to the child, and on the need to promote their development, with the full harnessing of their potential.229 130. In that respect, the best interests of the child principle is established as a benchmark to ensure the effective and full achievement of all of the rights of the child, as well as the integral and harmonious development of children.230 In particular, the Court has provided that the best interests of the child principle acts as a safeguard in connection with decisions that might entail some kind of limitation on the rights of the child, so that for a limitation to be legitimate it must be based on the best interests of the 223 IACHR, The Right of Boys and Girls to a Family. Alternative Care. Ending Institutionalization in the Americas. October 17, 2013, para. 38. 224 IACHR, The Right of Boys and Girls to a Family. Alternative Care. Ending Institutionalization in the Americas. October 17, 2013, para. 36. 225I/A Court H.R. Case of Fornerón and Daughter v. Argentina. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of April 27, 2012, Series C No. 242, para. 44; Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C, No. 221, para. 121; and Case of Atala Riffo and Daughters v. Chile. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 24, 2012. Series C No. 239, para. 196. 226 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, para. 62; and Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C, No. 221, para. 121. 227 United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 5, General measures of implementation of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, September 27, 2003, para. 12; and General Comment No. 14 on the right of the child to have his or her best interests taken as a primary consideration, May 29, 2013, para. 1. 228 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, paras. 56 and 60; y Case of Atala Riffo and Daughters v. Chile. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 24, 2012. Series C No. 239, para. 108. 229I/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, paras. 56 and 60; y Case of Atala Riffo and Daughters v. Chile. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of February 24, 2012. Series C No. 239, para. 108. 230 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Yean and Bosico Children v. Dominican Republic. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 8, 2005. Series C No. 130, para. 134. 25