education and training; (iv) identify those children who are particularly exposed to risks and to make direct contact with them; and (v) consider the particular situation of girls.318 221. The Committee on the Rights of the Child, in its General Comment 16, notes that the states have the obligation to regulate and supervise working conditions and to establish safeguards that protect children from economic exploitation and jobs that interfere in their education or impair their health or their physical, mental, spiritual, moral, or social development. In that context, the authorities entrusted with regulating and supervising the companies’ activities and operations should bear in mind the principles of the best interest of the child, non-discrimination, the holistic concept of child development, and the right of children to be heard.319 Moreover, mindful that it is in the unstructured sector of the economy and in family economies that one generally finds dangerous work for children, “States are required to design and implement programmes aimed at reaching businesses in these contexts, including by enforcing international standards regarding legal minimum age for work and appropriate conditions of work….”320 222. In a similar vein, the Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, in its General Comment 18, underscored the need to protect children “from all forms of work that are likely to interfere with their development or physical or mental health,” including economic exploitation and in a way that enables them to “pursue their full development and acquire technical and vocational education….”321 On child labor in particular, it indicated the states have the duty to “adopt effective measures to ensure that the prohibition of child labour will be fully respected.”322 223. The Commission reiterates its considerations established previously related to the situation of the Miskito divers, including the boatmen. In this regard, the IACHR recapitulates that there was a practice among the fishing vessels of recruiting Miskito boys to work, first as boatmen and subsequently as divers, under the same climate of abuse and insecurity. The IACHR also takes note that part of the context is the existence of sanctions on workers for failure to comply with the orders of the captains of the fishing vessels. 224. Along the same line as the previous point, the Commission considers that the considerations put forth in the previous section on breach of the State’s duty to regulate, oversee, and inspect underwater fishing in the zone by Miskito divers turn out to be equally applicable to the analysis of attribution of international responsibility on this point. 225. In addition, the report by the family members of the disappearance of the child Licar Méndez triggered the State’s obligation to take all measures necessary to establish his whereabouts, clarify the facts, and punish the persons responsible. According to the documentation produced by the parties, the State did not take any measure aimed at situating the whereabouts of Licar Méndez. In addition, and as indicated below, nor does one observe that the State has initiated investigations about what happened. 226. In view of the foregoing considerations, the Commission considers that the State is responsible for violating the right to life and the right to special protection for children, established at Article 4(1) and Article 19 of the America Convention, in relation to Article 1(1) of the same instrument. 3.4 On health care and the right to humane treatment for the surviving victims of the accidents 227. The Commission considers that the rights to life and humane treatment are directly and immediately tied to health care. In this regard, and as the Court has noted, the lack of adequate medical care I/A Court HR. Case of Workers of the Hacienda Brasil Verde v. Brazil. Preliminary Objections, Merits, Reparations and Costs. Judgment of October 20, 2016. Series C No. 318, para. 376. 319 Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment 16. On State obligations regarding the impact of the business sector on children's rights (April 17, 2013) paras. 13-23. 320 Committee on the Rights of the Child, General Comment 16. On State obligations regarding the impact of the business sector on children's rights (April 17, 2013) para. 36 321 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. General Comment 18. The Right to Work, November 24, 2005. Para. 15. 322 Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. General Comment 18. The Right to Work, November 24, 2005. Para. 24. 318 39