On May 9, the Verkhovna Rada approved new fines for evaders, and the day before, the Supreme Court determined when a citizen’s religious beliefs exclude responsibility for evading conscription during mobilization.
VIDEO OF THE DAY
Thus, the court heard about the case of a conscript who, being of limited fitness at the time, refused to receive a summons, citing the fact that military service contradicts his religious beliefs. He did not arrive at the conscription station at the time specified in the summons, thereby violating the requirements of Art. 65 of the Constitution of Ukraine and the procedure for staffing the Armed Forces established by the Law of Ukraine “On Mobilization Training and Mobilization”. He was found guilty of violating the mobilization legislation.
In the Criminal Court of Cassation, the Supreme Court noted that guaranteed by Art. 9 of the Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the right to practice one’s religion or belief in terms of the possibility of conscientious objection to military service is not absolute, but may be limited.
The provisions of Part 4 of Art. 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine as a constitutional and legal norm in accordance with Part 3 of Art. 8 of the Basic Law is a norm of direct effect. However, this constitutional provision only provides a constitutional guarantee of replacing military service with an alternative non-military one, provided there is such a circumstance as the incompatibility of military duty with a citizen’s religious beliefs. At the same time, the Constitution of Ukraine does not regulate the method of proving this circumstance, which is determined by special legislation.
It is noted that in such conditions it is necessary to objectively verify the statements of a person regarding the incompatibility of his religious beliefs with military service and to confirm with evidence the existence of relevant beliefs.
“This does not mean that the possibility of exercising the right to conscientiously refuse military service is limited to membership in registered religious organizations, the content of whose creed provides for the unconditional inadmissibility of such service, carrying and using weapons.” – noted in the CCS of the Supreme Court and added: “When refusing to serve in the armed forces for reasons of conscience, a person must demonstrate the presence of relevant deep, sincere and consistent religious convictions by certain data, in addition to his own words and the statements of relatives.”
In the aforementioned case, the Supreme Court took into account the fact that the convict does not belong to any religious organizations and served in the Armed Forces for a period of time, including for 5 months after the formation of his declared religious beliefs. Under such circumstances, the panel of judges agreed with the conclusions of the courts of the first and appellate instances that the convict did not prove that he had a deep and insurmountable conflict between the specified beliefs and military duty.
We would like to remind you that after May 18, when the new mobilization law comes into force, conscripts have 60 days to update their data in the TCC and SP and pass the VLK.
Photo by Pixabay
7
Read us on Facebook