A/HRC/45/7 VII. Conclusions and recommendations A. Conclusions 98. In conclusion, the Special Rapporteur recognizes that her mandate starts at a very challenging time when the very notion, grounds, purposes, targets, subjects, mechanisms and means of unilateral sanctions are drastically changing and expanding in the absence of consensus about their application and relevant legal grounds. The global health crisis created by COVID-19 has revealed the depth of the problem and demonstrated clearly that unilateral coercive measures may be deadly, especially for women, children, the elderly and other vulnerable categories of the population. 99. An analysis of the situation based on the submissions received from States and other relevant information demonstrates that, despite the repeated resolutions of the Human Rights Council, the General Assembly and the Security Council, States and international organizations are applying sanctions without or beyond the authorization of the Security Council to States, non-State entities and individuals. 100. The world community should undoubtedly have mechanisms to react to mass gross violations of human rights and to punish perpetrators. States are free to apply means of pressure that do not constitute violations of international law, or the illegality of which is excluded under international law, in particular, in the course of countermeasures taken in response to violations of international law committed against it or in response to violations of erga omnes obligations as formulated by the International Court of Justice. Taking such countermeasures should not, however, result in the arbitrary application of unilateral sanctions. 101. Therefore, the Special Rapporteur underscores that unilateral coercive measures and unilateral sanctions are interdependent. All unilateral coercive measures are unilateral sanctions but not all unilateral sanctions can be qualified as the unilateral coercive measures. Drafting a definition of unilateral coercive measures is important to establish a legal framework; such a definition will thus be an obligatory element of the declaration on unilateral coercive measures and the rule of law. 102. The absence of cooperation between States on the issue of unilateral coercive measures and the absence of clear, consistently used terminology means that there is an enormous possibility for abuse. The increasing number of sanctions applied by States and international organizations testifies to the necessity to restore the status of the United Nations as the centralized system of control over the use of any enforcement measure taken in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations and fundamental principles of international law. 103. All sanctions without or beyond the authorization of the Security Council can only be applied if they are in accordance with the principles of legality, legitimacy, necessity and proportionality and if due account is taken of the international obligations of States, especially in the sphere of human rights law, refugee law and humanitarian law. As the COVID-19 pandemic has demonstrated, no “high values” could justify the violation of fundamental human rights, including the right to life, the right to health and the right to food, especially in respect of those whose rights unilateral sanctions seek to promote. 104. Given the above-mentioned developments and challenges in the application of unilateral sanctions and the increasing number of people affected by such sanctions, the world community must take proportionate responses to guarantee that human rights are observed. The current situation clearly demonstrates that the tasks, the spheres of involvement and the mechanisms for the fulfilment of the mandate have expanded accordingly. 18