discriminatory practices at all their levels, especially in public entities and, lastly, they must adopt the necessary affirmative measures to ensure that everyone is truly equal before the law. 307 The Court has also established that States have the obligation to guarantee the principle of equality before the law and non-discrimination irrespective of a person’s migratory status, and this obligation extends to the sphere of the right to nationality. 308 In this regard, the Court has established, when examining a case with regard to the Dominican Republic, that the migratory status of the parents cannot be transmitted to their children. 309 C.2. Rights to recognition of juridical personality, to a name, and to identity 265. With regard to the right to juridical personality protected in Article 3 of the American Convention, the Court has stated that juridical personality “implies the ability to be a holder of rights (ability and enjoyment) and of obligations.” 310 Consequently, the State must put in place and respect the means and legal conditions to ensure that the right to juridical personality can be exercised freely and fully by those with title to this right. 311 This recognition determines the effective existence of this right before society and the State, which allows the individual to be a holder of other rights and obligations, to exercise them and to be able to function, which constitutes a right inherent in the human person that, pursuant to the American Convention, can never be derogated by the State. 312 The Court has also asserted that “[a] stateless person, ex definitione, does not have a recognized juridical personality, because he has not established a juridical and political relationship with any State.” 313 266. Furthermore, the Court has determined that the right to nationality forms part of what has been called the right to identity, defined by this Court as “the series of attributes and characteristics that permit the individualization of the person in society and, thus, encompasses a number of other rights according to the specific subject of rights and the circumstances of the case.” 314 RADDHO, Collectif des Veuves et ayant-droit, et Association mauritanienne des droits de l’homme v. Mauritania, paras. 129 and 131 (denationalization of black Mauritanians). 307 Cf. Case of the Yean and Bosico Girls v. Dominican Republic, para. 141. 308 Cf. Case of the Yean and Bosico Girls v. Dominican Republic, paras. 155 and 156. 309 Case of the Yean and Bosico Girls v. Dominican Republic, para. 156. 310 Case of Bámaca Velásquez v. Guatemala. Merits. Judgment of November 25, 2000, Series C No. 70, para. 179, and Case of the Río Negro Massacres v. Guatemala. Preliminary objection, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of September 4, 2012 Series C No. 250, para. 119. 311 Cf. Case of the Sawhoyamaxa Indigenous Community v. Paraguay. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 29, 2006. Series C No. 146, para. 189, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 25, 2010. Series C No. 212, para. 101. 312 Cf. Article 27 (Suspension of Guarantees) of the American Convention, and Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala, para. 101. 313 Case of the Yean and Bosico Girls v. Dominican Republic, para. 178. 314 Case of Gelman v. Uruguay, para. 122. The Court has also indicated that “the right to identity is not expressly established in the Convention. However, Article 29(c) of this instrument establishes that ‘[n]o provision of this Convention shall be interpreted as […] precluding other rights or guarantees that are inherent in the human personality or derived from representative democracy as a form of government.’ In this regard, […] an important source of reference regarding Article 29(c) of the American Convention and the corpus juris of international human rights law, is the Convention on the Rights of the Child, an international instrument that expressly recognizes the right to identity. Its Article 8(1) indicates that ‘States Parties undertake to respect the right of the child to preserve his or her identity, including nationality, name and family relations as acknowledged by law without unlawful interference.’ From the regulation of the norm contained in the Convention on Rights of the Child, it can be deduced that identity is a right that encompasses several elements, including nationality, name and family relationships, included in the said article in a descriptive but not restrictive manner. In the same way, the Inter-American Juridical Committee has underlined that the ‘right to identity is consubstantial to human 87