Conscientious Objection to the Military Service: A Right in Progress

The right to conscientiously object to the military service is well established in international law and “can be derived from the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief.” However, in many countries across the globe, believers of different religions and belief systems continue to face challenges in gaining access to alternative service and, more broadly, practicing their belief not to bear arms and participate in military service.

Photo by Amnesty International

This blog series provides case studies that illustrate such challenges in various contexts. Mine Yildirim discusses the heavy long-term legal and social consequences that non-recognition of objectors’ rights produces in Turkey. Ihntaek Hwang explains why the South Korean approach to alternative service remains punitive and aims to sanction those refusing to be conscripted. Nikolay Honhannisyan demonstrates on the selectiveness of the Armenian government in providing the right to object to believers of different religions. Moshe Jaffe shows how the Israel/Gaza war has changedthe debates over and the legal framework of the exemption for yeshiva students from ultra-Orthodox Jewish communities. Finally, Paola Goulart de Souza Spikes elaborates on why the Brazilian constitution does not allow exemptions from military service during war time.

(more…)

Continue Reading Conscientious Objection to the Military Service: A Right in Progress

Fairness or Failure? The Punitive Nature of South Korea’s Alternative Service

Ihntaek Hwang is an affiliated researcher at the Tampere Peace Research Institute (TAPRI) in Finland.

Since 1951, South Korea has conscripted all physically eligible males over the age of 18. For more than half a century, the South Korean state imprisoned conscientious objectors in large numbers lest they “jeopardize the military and, hence, the vital common interest of national security upon which the constitutional rights and freedoms of individuals stand.”[1] As of 2017, around 19,000 South Korean men had been imprisoned for refusing military service, most of whom received a sentence of 18 months. South Korean conscientious objectors even accounted for more than 90% of those imprisoned worldwide for conscientious objection.

(more…)

Continue Reading Fairness or Failure? The Punitive Nature of South Korea’s Alternative Service

Conscientious Objection: Context and Developments in Armenia

Nikolay Hovhannisyan is a senior program manager at Eurasia Partnership Foundation (EPF).

Introduction

The right to conscientious objection to military service is recognized under international law as a facet of the broader right to freedom of thought, conscience, and religion. Although not an independent right, conscientious objection is considered an inherent part of these fundamental freedoms, as articulated in key international instruments. Regionally, Europe has been particularly progressive in codifying this right, exemplified by the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) and decisions of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), which has set significant legal standards for the recognition of conscientious objection. Under the ECHR, the right to conscientious objection is based on Articles 9 and 4.[1] It was first examined by the ECtHR in Thlimmenos v. Greece (2000), decades after an initial review by the European Commission of Human Rights in Grandrath v. Germany (1966). In its latest decision, on 12 March 2024, the ECtHR in Kanatlı v. Turkey clarified that the right extends to refusal of reserve military service, expanding the understanding of conscientious objection.

(more…)

Continue Reading Conscientious Objection: Context and Developments in Armenia