32 to determine the criminal nature of actions that impair [the] personal integrity [of children].”118 87. In addition, regarding the forced disappearances of Ana Julia Mejía Ramírez, Carmelina Mejía Ramírez, Gregoria Herminia Contreras, Julia Inés Contreras, Serapio Cristian Contreras and José Rubén Rivera Rivera, the authorities’ refusal to acknowledge the said deprivation of liberty has been verified, as has its refusal to provide information on the whereabouts or fate of the victims, despite the measures taken by their next of kin and by the bodies in charge of the investigations (supra paras. 61, 67 and 78 and infra paras. 162 and 168). 88. Thus forced disappearance also leads to a violation of the right to recognition of juridical personality established in Article 3 of the American Convention,119 given that forced disappearance seeks not only one of the most serious ways of removing a person from the whole sphere of the legal system, but also denies his existence and leaves him in a sort of limbo or situation of juridical uncertainty before society and the State,120 especially when his identity has been altered illegally. 89. It has been proved that many of the disappeared children were registered under false information or had their personal data altered,121 as in the case of Gregoria Herminia. The effects of this are twofold: on the one hand, for the children who were appropriated, it makes it impossible to find their family and to learn their biological identity and, on the other, for the family of origin, who are prevented from exercising the legal remedies to reestablish the biological identity and the family ties and end the deprivation of liberty. In this regard, a statement made by Gregoria Herminia is illustrative: “If I had known even my name or my surname, I […] would have looked for [my parents], but I didn’t have that possibility and I think that what happened to me is also happening to my siblings, to other children, there are many who are suffering in the same way.”122 That violation only ceases when the truth about the identity is revealed in some way and the victims are guaranteed the legal and real possibility of recovering their true identity and, where appropriate, the family ties, with the pertinent legal consequences.123 90. Regarding Article 4(1) of the American Convention,124 the Court has considered that, owing to the nature of forced disappearance, the victim is in an aggravated situation of vulnerability, which gives rise to the risk that several rights may be violated, including the right to life. This situation is accentuated in the presence of a systematic pattern of human 118 Case of the Gómez Paquiyauri Brothers v. Peru. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of July 8, 2004. Series C No. 110, para. 170. 119 Article 3 of the Convention establishes that: “[e]very person has the right to recognition as a person before the law.” 120 Cf. Case of Anzualdo Castro, supra note 109, para. 90; Case of Gomes Lund et al. (Guerrilha do Araguaia), supra note 97, para. 122, and Case of Ibsen Cárdenas and Ibsen Peña, supra note 100, para. 98. 121 Cf. Expert opinion provided by Ana Georgina Ramos de Villalta, supra note 35, (evidence file, affidavits, folio 7534), and Asociación Pro-Búsqueda, La paz en construcción, supra note 34, (evidence file, volume IV, attachment 5 to the pleadings, motions and evidence brief, folio 2619/31). 122 Testimony given by Gregoria Herminia Contreras before the Inter-American Court during the public hearing held on May 17, 2011. 123 124 Cf. Case of Gelman, supra note 16, para. 131. Article 4(1) of the Convention stipulates that: “[e]very person has the right to have his life respected. This right shall be protected by law and, in general, from the moment of conception. No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his life.