137. Regarding the right to an identity, although it is not expressly envisaged in the American Declaration or in the American Convention, it is possible to ascertain it on the basis of the provisions of Article 8 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, which establishes that this right includes, among others, the right to a nationality, to a name, and to family relationships. The Inter-American Court has conceptualized the right to an identity as “the collection of attributes and characteristics that allow for the individualization of the person in a society, and, in that sense, encompasses a number of other rights according to the subject it treats and the circumstances of the case.”138 Furthermore, reference has been made to statements by the General Assembly of the Organization of American States and the Inter-American Juridical Committee:139 In accordance, the General Assembly of the Organization of American States (hereinafter “the OAS”) indicated “that the recognition of the identity of persons is one of the means through which observance of the rights to juridical personality, a name, nationality, civil registration, and family relationships is facilitated, among other rights recognized in international instruments, such as the American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man and the American Convention on Human Right.140 Likewise, it established “that failure to recognize one’s identity can mean that a person has no legal proof of his or her existence, which makes it difficult to fully exercise his or her civil, political, economic, social, and cultural rights.”141 In the same sense, the Inter-American Juridical Committee expressed that the right to identity is consubstantial to the attributes and human dignity. Consequently, it is an enforceable basic human right erga omnes as an expression of a collective interest of the overall international community that does not admit derogation or suspension in cases provided in the American Convention on Human Rights.” 138. Furthermore, the Court has referred to Argentina’s jurisprudence, which has determined that the illicit abduction and appropriation of children “affected the right to identity of the victims every time that the children's civil status had been changed and there had been an attribution of birth information that hindered knowing the true identity, eliminating any indication of the true origin and preventing contact with the true family members.”142 139. Although the American Declaration does not expressly envisage the right to a name, it has been recognized in Article 18 of the American Convention and in various international instruments.143 Likewise, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has stated that the right to a name, although it has not been expressly recognized by the European Convention on Human Rights, is protected under the right to private and family life as set forth in its Article 8.144 In turn, the Inter-American Court has pointed out that the given name and surname are “essential to establish formally the connection that exists between the different members of the family” and that the right to a name “constitutes a basic and essential element of the identity of each individual, without which he cannot be recognized by society or registered before the State.” 145 This right implies, therefore, that states must guarantee that the person is registered with the name chosen by him or her or by I/A Court H.R. Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C No. 221, para. 122. I/A Court H.R. Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C No. 221, para. 123. 140 OAS, “Inter-American Program for Universal Civil Registry and ‘Right to Identity,’” Resolution AG/RES. 2286 (XXXVII-O/07) of June 5, 2007; Resolution AG/RES. 2362 (XXXVIII-O/08) of June 3, 2008, and Resolution AG/RES. 2602 (XL-O/10), on follow-up on the program, of June 8, 2010. On that aspect, the Inter-American Juridical Committee considered that the American Convention on Human Rights, although it does not enshrine the right to identity expressly under that name, it does include, as indicated, the right to a name, the right to a nationality, and the right to the protection of family. Regarding this, the Inter-American Juridical committee, Opinion “on the scope of the right to identity,” resolution CJI/doc. 276/07 rev. 1, of August 10, 2007, paras. 11.2 and 18.3.3, ratified by means of resolution CJI/RES.137 (LXXI-O/07), of August 10, 2010. 141 OAS, “Inter-American Program for Universal Civil Registry and ‘Right to Identity,’” Resolution AG/RES. 2286 (XXXVII-O/07) of June 5, 2007; Resolution AG/RES. 2362 (XXXVIII-O/08) of June 3, 2008; and Resolution AG/RES. 2602 (XL-O/10), on follow-up on the program, of June 8, 2010. 142 I/A Court H.R. Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C No. 221, para. 124. 143 Article 24.2 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; Article 7.1 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child; Article 6.1 of the African Charter on the Rights and Welfare of the Child; Article 29 of the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families; and Article 18.2 of the Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities. 144 ECHR, Case of Stjerna v. Finland, Judgment of November 25, 1994, para. 37; and ECHR, Case of Burghartz v. Switzerland, Judgment of February 22, 1994, para. 24. 145 I/A Court H.R. Case of the Girls Yean y Bosico v. Dominican Republic. Judgment of September 8, 2005. Series C No. 130, paras. 182 and 184. 138 139