A/HRC/33/48 effect to its decision and recommendations. The decisions of the Committees under the communication procedure cannot be appealed. 43. As regards remedies and redress, although a Committee may render a decision as to remedial action to be taken by the State, such as compensation to the victim(s), their decisions are not legally binding on the State. Modalities on follow-up to the Committee’s recommendations are set out in the Optional Protocols to the Covenants. For example, as regards communications under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, the State party concerned must submit a response within six months on the measures taken to give effect to the Committee’s recommendations. The Committee may also request the State party to submit information in its subsequent periodic report on any measures taken to respond to the Committee’s recommendations.41 44. A case relating to sanctions imposed by the United Nations was brought before the Human Rights Committee under the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.42 Two Belgian nationals, whose names were placed on the United Nations Sanctions Committee list in early 2003 at the initiative of Belgium, submitted a communication to the Committee, claiming that through its proposal to place their names on the Sanctions Committee list without “relevant information” and through the subsequent imposition of sanctions, Belgium had violated several provisions of the Covenant, including the right to a fair trial and effective remedy (arts. 2 (3) and 14) and the right to liberty of movement (art. 12). The Committee found that it was competent “to admit a communication alleging that a State party had violated rights set forth in the Covenant, regardless of the source of the obligation implemented by the State party”, irrespective of the fact that the listing was effected at the request of Belgium by the Sanctions Committee further to Security Council resolution 1267. The Committee ruled that Belgium had violated the relevant rights protected under the Covenant. 45. In the light of the foregoing, the Special Rapporteur considers that the Committees established under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights are a fortiori competent to address claims relating to the legality of unilateral coercive measures and to recommend remedies for victims thereof. Special procedures of the Human Rights Council 46. Complaints based on violations of human rights through the imposition of unilateral coercive measures may also be submitted to the special procedures of the Human Rights Council. In this context, individuals or groups subject to unilateral coercive measures may bring allegations to the attention of the Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights who is empowered to act on individual cases by sending communications to the State(s) concerned in order to bring alleged violations and abuses to their attention. Communications may also be addressed to other special procedures, insofar as their mandate is of relevance to aspects of infringements of human rights related to the imposition of unilateral coercive measures. However, while States are expected to be accountable for national measures that have an adverse human rights impact on their domestic population, legal considerations alone are 41 42 12 See the Optional Protocol to the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 9 (3). See Communication No. 1472/2006, Sayadi and Vinck v. Belgium, Views adopted on 29 December 2008.