13 separation of children from their family may constitute, in certain circumstances, a violation of the said right to protection of the family,39 as even the legal separation of a child from his or her biological family is only applicable when duly justified in the best interest of the child, and is exceptional and, insofar as possible, temporary.40 In addition, given that during early childhood children exercise their rights through their next of kin,41 and that the family plays an essential role in their development,42 the separation of a minor from his biological parents may affect his right to personal integrity, contained in Article 5(1) of the Convention, insofar as it may jeopardize his or her development.43 15. In relation to the right to identity, the Court has indicated, quoting the InterAmerican Juridical Committee,44 that “it is a fundamental right” that “can be conceptualized, in general, as the series of attributes and characteristics that allow the individualization of a person in society and, in this regard, it comprises several other rights included in the Convention, according to the subject of rights in question and the circumstances of the case.”45 Thus, with regard to boys, girls, and adolescents, based on the provisions of Article 8 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, the right to identity comprises, among other matters, the right to family relationships.46 16. Due precisely due to the foregoing, and in view of the importance of the interests at stake, the right to physical integrity, the right to identity, and the right to the protection of the family, the administrative and judicial proceedings relating to the protection of the human rights of the child, particularly those judicial proceedings concerning the adoption, guardianship and custody of boys and girls in early childhood, must be handled by the authorities with exceptional diligence and celerity.47 The foregoing reveals a need to defend 2003. Series A No. 18, para. 66; Case of the Serrano Cruz Sisters v. El Salvador. Merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of March 1, 2005. Series C No. 120, para. 141; Case of Chitay Nech et al. v. Guatemala. Preliminary objections, merits, reparations and costs. Judgment of May 25, 2010. Series C No. 212, para. 157, and Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C No. 221, para. 125. 39 Cf. Advisory Opinion OC-17, supra note 38, paras. 71 and 72 and Case of Gelman v. Uruguay, supra note 38, para. 125. 40 Cf. Advisory Opinion OC-17, supra note 131, para. 77. Inter-American Court, Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011. Series C No. 221, para. 125. 41 Cf. Case of Gelman Vs. Uruguay, supra note 38, para. 129. 42 Cf. Case of Gelman v. Uruguay, supra note 38, paras. 66 and 71 and Advisory Opinion OC-17, supra note 38, paras. 53, 66 and 71. Similarly, Article 16 of the Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights, “Protocol of San Salvador” establishes that “[e]very child has the right to grow under the protection and responsibility of his parents; save in exceptional, judiciallyrecognized circumstances, a child of young age ought not to be separated from his mother.” 43 Cf. ECHR, Case of Mikulić v. Croatia No. 53176/99, February 7, 2002, para. 53; Case of Botta v. Italy No. 153/1996/772/973, 24 February 1998, para. 32, mutatis mutandis; Committee on the Rights of the Child. General Comment No. 7: Implementing child rights in early childhood. Fortieth session, U.N. Doc. CRC/C/GC/7/Rev.1, 20 September 2006, paras. 6(b), 10, 16, 18 and 36(b); United Nations, General Assembly, Declaration on social and legal principles relating to the protection and welfare of children, with special reference to foster placement and adoption nationally and internationally, Resolution 41/85 of 3 December 1986, article 2. 44 Cf. Inter-American Juridical Committee, Opinion “on the scope of the right to identity,” resolution CJI/doc. 276/07 rev. 1, of August 10, 2007, para, 12, ratified by resolution CJI/RES.137 (LXXI-O/07) of August 10, 2010. 45 Cf. Case of Gelman, supra note 38, para. 122. 46 Cf. Case of Gelman, supra note 38, para. 122. 47 Cf. United Nations, Human Rights Committee, Communication No. 1407/2005, 24 April 2009, CCPR/C/95/D/1407/2005, para. 7.3; Declaration on social and legal principles relating to the protection and welfare of children, with special reference to foster placement and adoption nationally and internationally, article 15; Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment No. 5: General measures for application of the Convention on the Rights of the Child, CRC/GC/2003/5, 27 November 2003, para. 24; ECHR, Case of Laino v. Italy No. 33158/96, 18 February 1999, para. 18; Case of Monory v. Romania and Hungary, No. 71099/01, 5 April 2005, para. 82; Case of H v. United Kingdom No. 9580/81, 8 July 1987, para. 85; Case of Paulsen-Medalen and