218. In the case at hand, the Commission has established that both the abandonment declaration proceedings and the subsequent adoption of the Ramírez brothers violated the right to the protection of the family and to a family life free of arbitrary interference with respect to the children, their mother, and the father of one of them. As indicated previously in this report, the family, a name, a nationality, and the family ties are constituent elements of the right of identity. Accordingly, in the circumstances of the case at hand, that violation also impaired the Ramírez brothers’ right of identity, and to know the history of their origin. The IACHR further notes that as a result of their adoption, the names and surnames of both children have reportedly been changed. 219. Because of this, the Commission believes that changing the Ramírez children’s names and surnames in that way further constituted an arbitrary usurpation of their names, which are a fundamental component of their identities. As the Court found in ruling on a violation of the right to a name in the case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador, an impairment of the right of identity and to a name persists when the State fails to adopt the measures necessary to make the pertinent changes in the registration and identity documents.290 In the case at hand, instead of taking steps to reinstate their family ties and names as central elements in the children’s identities, the State of Guatemala imposed a financial burden on the parents for bringing about that reinstatement, thereby failing to meet its strengthened obligations arising from the duty of affording special protection for children. 220. Consequently, the Commission finds that the State of Guatemala is responsible for violating the right of identity through the violations already established in this report. In addition, the Commission finds that the State is responsible for violating the right to a name established in Article 18 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1.1 thereof, with respect to the Ramírez brothers. 4. The right of the Ramírez brothers and their family to humane treatment 221. Article 5.1 of the American Convention provides that “every person has the right to have his physical, mental, and moral integrity respected.” Likewise, the Court has ruled that separating children from their families can have a specific and particularly grave impact on their personal integrity, with lasting effects.291 222. In the case at hand, the Commission believes that removing the Ramírez children from their home they shared with their mother without the minimum guarantees required by the applicable international standards, holding them in an institution for a year and a half where, according to Mrs. Ramírez, they were unable to receive visits from their family, and their subsequent international adoption in the circumstances described in this report were matters of such gravity that they tend to indicate a violation of the right to humane treatment both of the Ramírez brothers and of Mrs. Ramírez and Mr. Tobar. As regards Mr. Tobar, the Commission also takes into account the physical aggression and threats he claims to have received as a consequence of his search for his son Osmín to reestablish their link, together with the lack of protection provided in connection with those aggressions. Consequently, the IACHR concludes that the State of Guatemala violated Article 5.1 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Article 1.1 thereof, with respect to the Ramírez brothers, Mrs. Flor Ramírez, and Mr. Gustavo Tobar. V. CONCLUSIONS 223. Based on the legal and factual considerations set out above, the Inter-American Commission concludes that the State of Guatemala is responsible for violating the rights established in Articles 5, 7, 8, 11, 17, 18, 19, and 25 of the American Convention, in conjunction with Articles 1.1 and 2 thereof, with respect to the persons identified in each corresponding section of this report. 290 I/A Court H. R. Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2011. Series C No. 232, para. 111. 291 I/A Court H. R. Case of Contreras et al. v. El Salvador. Merits, Reparations, and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2011. Series C No. 232, para. 100. 44