A/HRC/31/82 punishment of individuals not responsible for political decisions. Unilateral coercive measures were also thought to undermine economic transparency, aggravate corruption, impede the delivery of remittances by the diaspora and create an environment conducive to the spread of unethical business practices. They were believed to ultimately ruin the infrastructures of society. 35. The rights of indigenous peoples suffered from many unilateral coercive measures, given that their resources and intellectual property were being taken from them simply because States thought that they had the right to do so. A plea was made that the rights of peoples, as well as those of individuals, be taken into account when considering the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on human rights. Non-governmental organizations welcomed the creation of the mandate of Special Rapporteur on the negative impact of unilateral coercive measures on the enjoyment of human rights, and expressed gratitude for his first report (A/HRC/30/45). 36. Specific situations of unilateral coercive measures imposed on developing countries, with devastating effects on human rights, were raised by non-governmental organizations. Representatives stated that sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran had targeted civilians for years, and had had a negative impact on their human rights, in particular their rights to health and to access to food. The sanctions had put a great amount of pressure on the population rather than the Government. 37. Reference was also made to the importance of recognizing the harmful effects of the blockade and trade embargo imposed against the Sudan, which has obstructed the State’s progress and had a severe impact on human rights, including the right to development. There was particular concern with regard to access to medicines in the Sudan, given that the sanctions prevented the local population from importing medicines. All development indicators had dropped owing to the sanctions imposed on the Sudan. Lastly, attention was drawn to the devastating effect of the sanctions imposed on Iraq and Afghanistan, in particular on the health of children. The panel members were asked to discuss the individual responsibility of government actors and leaders who had imposed those sanctions. C. Responses by panellists 38. The moderator summarized the questions asked during the two rounds of interactive discussion concerning the mechanisms that could prevent the adverse impact of unilateral coercive measures on human rights. The panellists were given the opportunity to respond to questions and issues raised from the floor and to make concluding remarks. 39. The Vice-Chairperson of the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights stated that the Human Rights Council was a part of the United Nations, the reference document of which is the Charter of the United Nations. After quoting the Preamble to the Charter, he affirmed that the Organization had been created to act and to take measures together, to be a centre in which activities would be agreed, and to address threats to international peace and security through its Security Council. In the twentieth century, the adoption of sanctions had led the world to global conflict. In current times, the Security Council was the one place where threats to international peace and security could be discussed and actions thereto agreed upon; unless this was respected, the world would slide into war. 40. The key questions to be asked concerned the actions available to measure the impact of unilateral coercive measures taken outside the Security Council, and how to determine the legitimacy of unilateral coercive measures. In no way should unilateral steps outside of the United Nations system be accepted. The draft articles of the International Law 9