47 2. No one may be the object of arbitrary or abusive interference with his private life, his family, his home, or his correspondence, or of unlawful attacks on his honor or reputation. 3. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks. 136. Regarding the alleged violation of Article 11 (Right to Privacy) of the American Convention to the detriment of Maritza Urrutia, alleged by the representatives of the alleged victim, this Court considers that the facts have given rise to issues that have been included in the previously established violation of Article 5 (Right to Humane Treatment) of the American Convention (supra paras. 85 and 98). XIII ARTICLE 19 (RIGHTS OF THE CHILD) Arguments of the representatives of the alleged victim 137. In its brief with final arguments, the representatives of the alleged victim alleged the violation of Article 19 of the Convention, to the detriment of the son and the nephew and niece of Maritza Urrutia, with whom she lived at the time of the abduction and with whom she had a close loving relationship. It was foreseeable that the sudden disappearance of the alleged victim, mother and aunt, respectively, would harm these children, affecting their self-confidence and feeling of well-being. Arguments of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights 138. The Commission did not refer to the violation of Article 19 of the Convention alleged by the representatives of the alleged victim. Arguments of the State 139. The State did not present any specific argument on the alleged violation of Article 19 of the Convention. Considerations of the Court 140. With regard to the alleged violation of Article 19 of the Convention, introduced by the representatives of the alleged victim, which was not included in the brief of requests, arguments and evidence, but only in the brief with final arguments, the Court considers that this allegation is time-barred; however, it is not prevented from examining it, in accordance with the iuri novit curia principle.101 In the instant case, the Court has acknowledged that the situation experienced by Fernando Sebastián Barrientos Urrutia, owing to the abduction and detention of his mother, occasioned him suffering and anguish; it will therefore take this circumstance into consideration when establishing pertinent reparations (infra paras. 169.a and 170). XIV 101 Cf. “Five Pensioners” case, supra note 14, para. 156; Cantos case, supra note 90, para. 58; and Hilaire, Constantine and Benjamin et al. case, supra note 92, para. 107.