63 emphatic in pointing out that these special measures must be considered specifiable on the basis of the needs of the child as a subject of law.343 204. For the purposes of establishing the contents and scope of the general provision set forth in Article 19 of the American Convention, the Court has established that both the American Convention and the Convention on the Rights of the Child comprise an international corpus iuris for the protection of the rights of the child.344 205. In the present case, the Commission deems it is relevant to refer to the specific obligations set forth in Articles 6 and 38 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child345, as well as article 4.3 of the Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts 346, as part of said corpus iuris that call for respect and guarantee for the right to life by adopting all possible measures to ensure their protection and the care of children affected by an armed conflict. 5. General considerations about the right to life and extrajudicial executions 206. The Commission draws attention to the fact that the right to life is a prerequisite for enjoying all other human rights and without which all the others have no meaning. 347 In that regard, compliance with Article 4 in connection with Article 1.1 of the American Convention does not only presuppose that no person shall be arbitrarily deprived of his/her life (negative obligation), but in addition requires that States taken all appropriate measures to protect and safeguard the right to life (positive obligation), under their duty to guarantee the full and free exercise of the rights of all persons under their jurisdiction.348 207. As part of these measures, it should be stressed that the obligation of States to: i) draw up an adequate regulatory framework that deters any threat to the right to life; ii) ensure that their Republic. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of September 8, 2005. Series C No. 130, paragraph 134; and Case of the Yakye Axa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of June 17, 2005. Series C No. 125, paragraph 172. 343 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006, paragraph 154. 344 Ratified by the State of Colombia on January 28, 1991. 345 Article 6: 1. States Parties recognize that every child has the inherent right to life. 2. States Parties shall ensure to the maximum extent possible the survival and development of the child. Article 38: 1. States Parties undertake to respect and to ensure respect for rules of international humanitarian law applicable to them in armed conflicts which are relevant to the child. […] 4. In accordance with their obligations under international humanitarian law to protect the civilian population in armed conflicts, States Parties shall take all feasible measures to ensure protection and care of children who are affected by an armed conflict. 346 Colombia is a State party of the Additional Protocol II to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949 and relating to the Protection of Victims of Non-International Armed Conflicts since August 14, 1995. Article 4.3: Children shall be provided with the care and aid they require […]. 347 I/A Court H.R., Case of the Street Children (Villagrán-Morales and others) v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, paragraph 144. 348 I/A Court H.R., Case of Zambrano Vélez and others v. Ecuador. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of July 4, 2007. Series C No. 166, paragraph 80; Case of the Street Children (Villagrán-Morales and others). Merits. Judgment of November 19, 1999. Series C No. 63, paragraph 144.