afterwards he received death threats over the phone indicating that "since there was no one to defend [him], now he was going [...] to die, the son of a bitch.”219 122. Because of this complaint, on April 23, 2009, the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman of Guatemala requested the Directorate General of the National Civilian Police Force to provide personal security and a security perimeter for Mr. Gustavo Tobar.220 The Commission has no knowledge about whether or not protection measures were adopted for the benefit of Mr. Tobar. B. Legal analysis 123. The purpose of the present case is to have the Inter-American Commission review the deeds and omissions of the authorities who took said decisions and who gave the Ramírez brothers up for international adoption in order to establish whether or not the State's actions were compatible with its obligations under the American Convention. To this end, the Commission shall recapitulate, first of all, the international standards that establish the obligations which, in the light of Articles 5, 7, 8, 11, 17, 18, 19 and 25 of the American Convention, the State must fulfill in a case such as the present one and, subsequently, to determine if the State is internationally responsible for the failure to fulfill these obligations in the present case, specifically in the framework of the proceedings for the judicial declaration of abandonment, the adoption proceedings, and the respective appeals. Taking into account the placement of the Ramírez children in an institution and by virtue of the iura novit curia principle, the Commission deems it is relevant to include Article 7 of the American Convention in the analysis. 1. General considerations about the international standards that are relevant for the application of the American Convention in the present case 1.1. Rights of the child 124. Both the Commission and the Inter-American Court have pointed out that, for the purposes of defining the content and scope of the obligations that the State has pledged to fulfill when the rights of the child are examined, it is necessary to resort to the international corpus juris for the protection of the child.221 125. The American Convention provides, in its Article 19, that "[E]very minor child has the right to the measures of protection required by his condition as a minor on the part of his family, society, and the state.” 126. In addition to Article 19 of the American Convention, in order to interpret the significance, contents, and scope of the rights of the child, the bodies of the Inter-American System have used the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child,222 ratified by Guatemala on June 6, 1990. Likewise, the corpus juris framework also includes, for purposes of interpretation, the decisions adopted by the United Nations 219 Annex 54. Brief submitted to the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman, received on April 1, 2009. Annex 4 to the communication of the petitioners of July 19, 2013. 220 Annex 55. Written record issued by the Office of the Human Rights Ombudsman, addressed to the Directorate General of the National Civilian Police Force with respect to the above-mentioned complaint on April 23, 2009. Notifications Nos. 7532, 2945, and 4595 from the National Civilian Police Force. 221 I/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. See also: IACHR, The Right of Boys and Girls to a Family. Alternative Care. Ending Institutionalization in the Americas. October 17, 2013, para. 34. 222 IACHR, The Right of Boys and Girls to a Family. Alternative Care. Ending Institutionalization in the Americas. October 17, 2013, para. 36. 24