Article 6 of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights (link to full declaration) states:
Article 6 – Consent
1. Any preventive, diagnostic and therapeutic medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned, based on adequate information. The consent should, where appropriate, be express and may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without disadvantage or prejudice.
2. Scientific research should only be carried out with the prior, free, express and informed consent of the person concerned. The information should be adequate, provided in a comprehensible form and should include modalities for withdrawal of consent. Consent may be withdrawn by the person concerned at any time and for any reason without any disadvantage or prejudice. Exceptions to this principle should be made only in accordance with ethical and legal standards adopted by States, consistent with the principles and provisions set out in this Declaration, in particular in Article 27, and international human rights law.
3. In appropriate cases of research carried out on a group of persons or a community, additional agreement of the legal representatives of the group or community concerned may be sought. In no case should a collective community agreement or the consent of a community leader or other authority substitute for an individual’s informed consent.
The article 27 (and associated article 28) which is referenced in point 2 states:
Article 27 – Limitations on the application of the principles
If the application of the principles of this Declaration is to be limited, it should be by law, including laws in the interests of public safety, for the investigation, detection and prosecution of criminal offences, for the protection of public health or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others. Any such law needs to be consistent with international human rights law.
Article 28 – Denial of acts contrary to human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignityNothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any claim to engage in any activity or to perform any act contrary to human rights, fundamental freedoms and human dignity.
About the Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, wiki states:
It aims to provide a comprehensive framework of principles that should guide biomedical activities, in order to ensure that they are in conformity with international human rights law.[8] (link)
As regards Article 6.1 of the UNESCO declaration, aside from its direct importance as regards vacination, I have heard also some making the case that individuals being coerced into wearing facemasks in public, might be covered too - given the justification that such is a 'preventative'.