the following manner: (1) the provision of health services during pregnancy, childbirth and postpartum and its relationship to the guarantee of the rights to life and to personal integrity; (2) an analysis of this specific case and (3) its conclusion. This analysis is based on the assumption that Ms. Brítez Arce was in a situation of special vulnerability due to her pregnancy,39 which places special duties on the State.40 B.1 Provision of health services during pregnancy, childbirth and post-partum period and the guarantee of the rights to life and to personal integrity 57. The Court recalls that the State recognized its international responsibility for violating the rights to life, to personal integrity and to health, recognized in Articles 4(1), 5(1) and 26 of the American Convention. For its analysis on the alleged violation of the right to health, it finds it necessary to consider concomitantly the violations of the rights to life and to personal integrity of Ms. Brítez Arce that occurred during her medical care and their relationship with the acts comprising obstetric violence. The Court has recognized that both civil and political rights and economic, social, cultural and environmental rights are inseparable and, therefore, their recognition and enjoyment ineluctably fall under the principles of universality, indivisibility, interdependence and inter-relationship,41 which means that both categories of rights must be understood integrally and universally as human rights, without any hierarchy, and are enforceable in every case before the competent authorities.42 Specifically, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in its General Comment No. 22 on the right to sexual and reproductive health, stated: The right to sexual and reproductive health is also indivisible from and interdependent with other human rights. It is intimately linked to civil and political rights underpinning the physical and mental integrity of individuals and their autonomy, such as the rights to life; liberty and security of person; freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment; privacy and respect for family life; and nondiscrimination and equality.43 39 Cf. Case of Gelman v. Uruguay. Merits and Reparations. Judgment of February 24, 2011, para. 97. Mutatis mutandis, Case of the Miguel Castro Castro Prison v. Peru. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of November 25, 2006. Series C No. 160, para. 298 and Differentiated approaches with respect to certain groups of persons in detention (Interpretation and scope of Articles 1(1), 4(1), 5, 11(2), 12, 13, 17(1), 19, 24 and 26 of the American Convention on Human Rights and other human rights instruments). Advisory Opinion OC-29/22 of May 30, 2022. Series A No. 29, para. 128. 40 Different international instruments contain specific provisions on the special duties of States with respect to pregnancy. The American Declaration of the Rights and Duties of Man states, in its Article VII, that “[a]ll women, during pregnancy and the nursing period, and all children have the right to special protection, care and aid.” Similarly, Article 4(2) of the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women states that “[a]doption by States Parties of special measures, including those measures contained in the present Convention, aimed at protecting maternity shall not be considered discriminatory” and its Article 12(2) indicates that “[n]otwithstanding the provisions of paragraph I of this article, States Parties shall ensure to women appropriate services in connection with pregnancy, confinement and the post-natal period, granting free services where necessary, as well as adequate nutrition during pregnancy and lactation.” Argentina ratified this treaty on June 15, 1985. 41 The Preamble to the Additional Protocol to the American Convention on Human Rights in the Area of Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (“Protocol of San Salvador”) states that “[c]onsidering the close relationship that exists between economic, social and cultural rights, and civil and political rights, in that the different categories of rights constitute an indivisible whole based on the recognition of the dignity of the human person, for which reason both require permanent protection and promotion if they are to be fully realized, and the violation of some rights in favor of the realization of others can never be justified.” See, also: Case of Lagos del Campo v. Peru. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of August 31, 2017. Series C No. 340, para. 141 and Case of Guevara Díaz v. Costa Rica. Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of June 22, 2022. Series C No. 453, para. 56. 42 Cf. Case of Lagos del Campo v. Peru, supra, para. 141. On this matter, the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights stated in its General Comment No. 22 on the right to sexual and reproductive health that “the lack of emergency obstetric care services or denial of 43 15