A/HRC/28/74 economic, social and cultural rights by virtue of any determination that their leaders have violated norms of international peace and security.18 Although this comment seems to apply to sanctions adopted by the Security Council, it applies equally to unilateral coercive measures. 16. Several human rights obligations of States incorporated into the various core international human rights instruments provide limitations on unilateral coercive measures that have an impact on the enjoyment of human rights by the civilian population in targeted States. These include, inter alia, the right to life; 19 the right to an adequate standard of living, including food, clothing, housing and medical care; 20 and the right to health.21 In this regard, the Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action called upon States: to refrain from any unilateral measures not in accordance with international law and the Charter of the United Nations that creates obstacles to trade relations among states and impedes the full realization of the human rights set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in international human rights instruments, in particular the rights of everyone to a standard of living adequate for their health and well-being, including food and medical care, housing and the necessary social services.22 17. Previous studies conducted at the request of the Subcommission on Human Rights and by the Human Rights Council already documented the likely negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the civilian population of targeted and non-targeted States, and included case studies documenting the impact of such measures. These studies clearly indicated the likely and actual negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the civilian population, particularly on vulnerable groups, including women, children, the infirm and older persons, as well as the poor, caused by the deprivation of access to basic services, such as life-saving equipment and medication, food, educational equipment and the loss of jobs. They also pointed out that long-term unilateral coercive measures have a more severe negative impact on the economic, social and cultural rights of the affected population enshrined in the core human rights instruments, such as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights.23 18. In this regard, the presentations made during the workshops organized by OHCHR in April 2013 and May 2014 highlighted some of the negative effects of both multilateral and unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights by the civilian population, particularly the disproportionate impact such measures have on women and children. One of the panellists stressed that the impact of unilateral coercive measures was more deeply felt by women and marginalized communities, and that women were the first to lose jobs, to be moved out of higher education, suffer from malnourishment and face food insecurity. He also gave specific relevant examples of the plight of women and children in the Islamic Republic of Iran and Cuba. 24 In several of the presentations made at 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 E/C.12/1997/8, para. 16. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, art. 3; International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, art. 6, para. 1; Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 6, para. 1. Universal Declaration of Human Rights, art. 25, para. 1; International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, art. 11, para. 1; Convention on the Rights of the Child, art. 27, para. 1. International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, arts. 11, para. 2, and 12, para. 1. A/CONF.157/23, para. 31. See A/HRC/27/32. See also footnote 11. Anuradha M. Chenoy, presentation made at the workshop on the various aspects relating to the impact of the application of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights by the affected population in the States targeted, Geneva, 5 April 2013. 7