A/HRC/30/45 41. International humanitarian law makes it possible in wartime to lift export bans and to provide safe channels to satisfy the basic human rights of the civilian population. 26 The Geneva Convention also bans collective reprisals. 27 42. Source countries claim that medical equipment, medicines and other items necessary to meet basic human rights are exempt from restrictive measures applied in peacetime. Yet for a series of reasons, 85,000 cancer patients in a country targeted by unilateral coercive measures cannot find locally the required treatment through no fault of the country concerned. Rights holders in target countries where the negative impact of such measures is particularly acute could be considered as in a war zone and benefit from the protection of humanitarian law, which has the advantage of being neutral while the context of unilateral coercive measures is very heavily charged politically. Independent procurement agencies of third countries could be involved in providing humanitarian supplies in peacetime for target countries whose delivery, even though allowed by source countries, may be hampered indirectly because of a payments freeze or ban on the use of international telecommunications payment mechanisms. Likewise, unilateral coercive measures of the kind that prevents access to life-saving drugs are comparable to collective reprisals and would therefore be banned under humanitarian law. C. Issues of remedies and redress 43. Finally, on the issue of redress for innocent victims of unilateral coercive measures, the European Court of Justice has acted on several occasions to annul decisions regarding such measures taken by the European Union. In very rare cases, it has acted to indemnify symbolically individual victims. Since close to half of the States Members of the United Nations have at one time or another been targeted by unilateral coercive measures in the recent past, the most realistic form of redress would be an apology to innocent victims for the “collateral damage” to their human rights entitlements which has occurred because of those measures, together with a commitment to try harder, if not to end the measures, at least to continue seeking ways to reduce the unintended adverse human rights impact they have on the civilian population. 44. In view of the shortcomings of adjudicatory procedures at the national and regional levels and of the real global challenges posed by unilateral coercive measures at the global level, the issue of an independent mechanism of the United Nations human rights machinery may at some stage have to be considered to promote accountability and reparations. VII. Projected activities of the Special Rapporteur A. Information gathering 45. In accordance with his mandate, the Special Rapporteur will endeavour to gather relevant information, including from Governments, non-governmental organizations and other interested or concerned parties, on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights. 26 27 See Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I), 8 June 1977, Art. 70. See Convention (IV) relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, Geneva, 12 August 1949, Art. 33. 13