• Non-discrimination: Emergency measures shall not discriminate. Because emergency responses may have discriminatory consequences, states may be required to take positive measures to ensure substantive equality.31 The principle of non-discrimination is especially important when assessing the impacts of emergency measures on the rights of women and girls. The international instruments and guidance that address states of emergency and derogation are gender blind; they do not foresee differential impacts of states of emergency on women and men, boys and girls, nor do they describe any heightened requirements concerning the potential violation of the rights of women or girls due to emergency measures. The UN Human Rights Committee has made clear, however, that the conditions for derogation from the ICCPR must not involve discrimination “solely on the ground of race, colour, sex, language, religion or social origin,” consistent with other provisions of the Covenant, namely Article 26.32 Article 26 refers to emergency measures, or derogations, that are directly discriminatory. It has been observed in previous crises that emergency measures have disparately impacted women and impeded their abilities to exercise their fundamental rights, even though the emergency measures themselves did not make specific distinctions for women. Some types of emergency measures were proscribed in a sweeping manner, without consideration for the particular status of women. The European Court of Human Rights has addressed an analogous issue, and ruled that when states fail to take into account the specific needs of persons belonging to disadvantaged groups, this may result in discrimination. Thus, the Council of Europe has suggested that the exceptional measures taken to address the spread of the coronavirus or “failure to provide adequate support, or more generally a decline in tolerance in societies under strain, may pose a threat to persons belonging to minorities and marginalised communities and to the fundamental principles of non-discrimination, diversity and inclusion.”33 2.3. INDIVISIBILITY AND INTERDEPENDENCE OF HUMAN RIGHTS The response to the COVID-19 public health crisis has underscored the importance of the principles of indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of human rights. The coronavirus has posed an immediate threat to the rights to life and to health. The emergency measures adopted have aimed to control the spread of the pandemic and protect human life, while an inevitable consequence of the measures has been to curtail civil and political rights, as well as economic, social and cultural rights. The emergency measures themselves have also intersected and had multiplier effects. For instance, measures to limit freedom of movement 31 In reference to derogations from the ECHR, Council of Europe, “Respecting Democracy, Rule of Law and Human Rights in the Framework of the COVID-19 Sanitary Crisis”, 7 April 2020, <https://rm.coe.int/ sg-inf-2020-11-respecting-democracy-rule-of-law-and-human-rights-in-th/16809e1f40>. 32 UNHRC, “General Comment No. 29 on States of Emergency (Article 4)”, op. cit., note 12, para 8. 33 Council of Europe, Steering Committee on Anti-Discrimination, “The Anti-Discrimination, Diversity and Inclusion Dimensions of the Response to COVID-19”, 8 April 2020, <https://rm.coe.int/cdadi-introductory-note-en-08042020-final-version/16809e201d>, p. 2. 12