IFOR speaks at the UN on the right to conscientious objection to military service in Finland

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation regularly engages in States reviews at the UN, in particular during the Universal Periodic Review at the Human Rights Council and at the Human Rights Committee.

During the UPR review, NGOs have the opportunity to submit a country based report and to actively engage in the pre-session. IFOR submitted a report on the situation of the right to conscientious objection to military service in Finland, last year at the 41st session of the UPR. Later in September engaged at the pre-session together with the Union of Conscientious Objectors from Finland (AKL) whose representative gave a presentation during the pre-session. 

A joint advocacy activity at the UN in Geneva and locally in Helsinki followed and 5 countries made specific recommendations to Finland regarding the issue of punitive alternative service, imprisonment of objectors  and other during the formal session of the UPR last November. 

Click here to watch the 41st UPR of Finland.

The UPR procedure ends with the adoption of the report of the Working Group during the Human Rights Council.

On Monday 27th, the Council adopted the UPR report on Finland and members states and representatives of the civil society had the chance to take the floor. Jyry Virtanen of AKL, spoke on behalf of IFOR to comment on the no acceptance of Finland of the thematic recommendations and encouraging the government to comply with international standards.

---

Human Rights Council, 52nd Session 

27th March 2023 

UPR adoption – Finland 

Oral statement delivered by the International Fellowship of Reconciliation. 

Mr. President, 

During the 4th cycle of the UPR, Finland received five recommendations from Costa Rica, Croatia,  Luxembourg, Panama and Uruguay to comply with international standards concerning the right to  conscientious objection to military service. In particular to ensure an alternative service nor punitive or  discriminatory as to its nature and duration1fully under civilian authority; to end the imprisonment of  conscientious objectors and extend the possibility to alternative service. 

Finland merely noted those recommendations and stated that they are already addressing them2.  Unfortunately, these issues are still affecting conscientious objectors and their rights. 

The Human Rights Committee raised concerns about the prosecutions and discrimination against  conscientious objectors to military service and lack of awareness with regard to non-military service3.  Unfortunately, none of the recommendations regarding this matter have been accepted. The Finnish  government stated that “the recommendation to take measures to inform the public of the right to refuse  military service and to extend this possibility to alternative military service will be taken into account in  connection with the possible call-up reform.”4 However, this call-up reform itself does not comply with  international standards. The call-up reform is based on recommendations published by a parliamentary  committee on the development on conscription and fulfilling national defence obligation.  Recommendations given by the committee would further deteriorate equality within the conscription  system. 

We encourage Finland to fully comply with international standards pertaining to the human right to  conscientious objection and urge the government to reconsider the length of the alternative service, to  ensure that the civilian service advisory board is fully under the control of civilian authority and free the  current total objectors in probation.5 

Thank you. 

Click here to download the full statement with footnotes.

Click here to watch the Finnish Conscientious objector (from AKL) accredited by IFOR, delivering the statement.

Click here for more details on Finland UPR.

IFOR speaks at the UN on militarization of children and violations of the right to conscientious objection in Belarus

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation participated in the interactive dialogue which took place this morning in the plenary of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights presented a report on the situation of human rights in Belarus in the run-up to the 2020 presidential election and in its aftermath, highlighting several ongoing grievous violations in the country and the high number of political prisoners, including Ales Bialiatski, 2022 Nobel Peace Prize laureate, who has been sentenced a few weeks ago to 10 years in prison, together with three of his colleagues, in response to massive protest over 2020 election. Read more here.

IFOR has taken the floor to highlight the concerning militarization of children and youth and the recent amendments to the Criminal code and introduction of death penalty, which will apply to deserters as well.

IFOR has also mentioned as these concerning amendments will affect as well those who engaged in nonviolent blockage actions of military railway transportations supporting Russian army engaging in the war of aggression in Ukraine.

---

Human Rights Council, 52nd Session 

22nd March 2023 

Item 4: Interactive dialogue on the OHCHR report on the situation of human rights in Belarus in  the run-up to the 2020 presidential election and in its aftermath 

Oral statement delivered by the International Fellowship of Reconciliation. 

Mr. President, Madam Deputy High Commissioner,  

International Fellowship of Reconciliation (IFOR) is very alarmed by the increasing militarization in Belarus, and in particular by Belarusian military training programs of children and [the institution of] military-patriotic clubs for children and youth. According to the statistics, in the summer of 2022 over 18,000 children underwent training in militarized patriotic camps, where children as young as 6 have been trained to use firearms, for instance. [Those camps result to be under the patronage of the Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Ministry of Emergency Situations.]

IFOR is also very concerned by the ongoing violations of the human right to conscientious objection to military service [and the conditions of military service itself].

Although in September 2022 it was stated that there would be no mobilization in Belarus, starting from October it has been declared that Belarus would participate in a 'special operation' and joint activities with the Russian militaries started. 

On October 12, 2022, the Belarusian parliament adopted in the first reading a draft law which, among other things, updated the grounds for granting the right to defer conscription, reducing the number of persons receiving deferment of conscription. 

In August-December 2022, there have been at least six cases of men charged under Article 435, Part 1 of the Criminal Code (evasion of regular call-up to active military service). [One of them was fined 2,240 BYN  (approximately 907 EUR)v. On September 29, 2022, a 24-year-old man who wanted to avoid military service and went to Poland was tried. He was detained on his return to Belarus and sentenced to a two-month arrest. 

On August 18, 2022, a criminal case was brought against two women in Vitebsk who tried to protect their son and nephew from military service. They have been arrested and face up to seven years in prison.] 

On February 21, 2023, the deputies of the House of Representatives of the National Assembly approved in the second reading amendments to the Criminal Code, in particular, they introduced criminal liability for discrediting the army and death penalty for high treason, and thus for desertion. 

In May 2022, an amendment to the Criminal Code introduced the death penalty for attempted acts of terrorism. It has been reported a possible link between the adoption of this amendment and similar ones and the so-called phenomenon of “Belarusian railway partisans” who are conducting non-violent actions blocking military railway transportation, mostly Russian. 

IFOR calls on this Council to ensure the universality and non-derogability of human rights and urge Belarus to respect children rights and conscientious objectors’ rights and respect General Assembly resolution 77/222 on death penalty, as restated by the High Commissioner Mr. Volker Türk at the opening of this session.

Thank you. 

Click here to download the full statement with footnotes.

Click here to watch the Interactive Dialogue and IFOR main representative to the UN, Ms. Zaira Zafarana, delivering the statement in the plenary of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

---

There is ongoing concern about mobilization in Belarus and involvement in the Russian war of aggression in Ukraine.

IFOR, together with War Resisters' International, European Bureau for Conscientious Objection and Connection e.V, launched the international campaign #ObjectWarCampaign to appeal to the European institutions and member states to protect those who refuse to engage the current war in Ukraine and fell Belarus, Russia and Ukraine where their human right to conscientious objection to militray sevrice is violated and their life threatened.

Read more about the Campaign here.

Sign the online petition and join the already more than 33.000 petitioners here!

Webinar #3 "Conscientious objection to military service in times of war: Eritrea"

Cliquez ici pour lire la suite en français.

Haga clic aquí para leer más en español.

The webinar series launched in February 2023 on “Conscientious Objection to military service in times of war” continues with a new session focusing on Eritrea and the war in Tigray
Webinar #3 will take place on March 23rd  at 4 pm Geneva time and will host campaigners of the Eritrean Movement for Democracy and Human Rights and Surbana – Voice of Eritrean Refugees.

Conscientious Objection in Times of War – Focus on Eritrea
March 23 rd 2023, 4 pm CET
Interpretation will be provided in English, French, and Tigrinja.

How can we support conscientious objectors and deserters from Eritrea?
In the summer of 2018, Eritrea and Ethiopia signed a peace treaty that ended the no war no peace stalemate emanating from the border war of 1998-2000. Just two years later the conflict in the Ethiopian province of Tigray escalated. Eritrean security forces have been heavily involved in operations in support of the Ethiopian government since the outbreak of the conflict, and have carried out some of the conflict’s worst abuses. Eritrean authorities have conducted waves of roundups in Eritrea to identify people it considers draft evaders or deserters. And the Eritrean military was destroying and raiding Eritrean refugee camps in the north of Ethiopia. The Eritrean dictatorship under Isayas Afewerki uses an army, which is deployed for the aims of the regime through unlimited military service for men and women.
In recent years, we have observed that despite unchanged human rights violations, European governments have increasingly granted Eritrean refugees protection of inferior quality or have even rejected them. Moreover, refugees have been forced to go to the Eritrean embassies and consulates, where they are pressured to pay a 2% tax to their country of origin and to sign a so-called letter of regret, in which they agree to accept any punishment for their escape from Eritrea.

Read here the statement delivered by IFOR at the current UN 52nd session of Human Rights Council on Eritrea.

Speakers
Helen Kidan (Eritrean Movement for Democracy and Human Rights)
George Ghebreslassie (Surbana)

Registration
Please use the link here to register.

This is an event organised by International Fellowship of Reconciliation and War Resisters’ International in collaboration with Connection e.V. and is taking place on the occasion of the 52nd session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

Pass along the word on social media.

Read more about Webinar #1

And Webinar #2.

Click here to download flyer.

IFOR joins statement on Western Sahara at the UN

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation is part of the Geneva Support Group for the Protection of Human Rights in Western Sahara.

The Supporting Group organizes thematic events, advocacy initiatives and joint statements.

On the occasion of the General Debate with the High Commissioner for Human Rights at the 52nd session of the Human Rights Council, the Supporting Group delivered a joint statement.

Association Mauritanienne pour la Promotion du Droit December 12th Movement International Secretariat International Association Against Torture (IAAT-AICT) International Educational Development, Inc. Paz y Cooperación World Barua Organisation

General Assembly
Human Rights Council
52nd session

Item 2 – Annual report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights General debate

I thank you Mr. President,

I have the honour to speak on behalf of a group of over 300 organisations (https://www.genevaforwesternsahara.org/members-miembros-membres) called Geneva Support Group for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights in Western Sahara.

Mr. High Commissioner,

We noted with appreciation your Office concerns about the human rights situation in the occupied Non-Self-Governing Territory of Western Sahara and its remote monitoring. But this is clearly not enough.

Indeed, after your Office mission of 2006, the Saharawis had to wait until 2015 for a new mission to visit the occupied Western Sahara. The occupying Power cannot continue barring access to the Territory in order to ensure impunity for the crimes committed against Saharawis.

The systematic and serious violations of international humanitarian law and human rights committed by the Kingdom of Morocco in the Non-Self-Governing Territory of Western Sahara need the development and implementation of independent and credible measures to ensure full respect for human rights, a requested by the Security Council.

As scandals break out in Europe in political and media circles in relation to suspicious acts of corruption on the part of the Kingdom of Morocco, it would be wise for the occupying Power to take seriously the request of the Security Council and to fully cooperate with the Office of the High Commissioner.

I thank you for your attention.

8 March 2023

******

Assemblée générale
Conseil des droits de l'homme
51ème session

Point 2 - Rapport annuel du Haut-Commissaire des Nations Unies aux droits de l'homme Débat général

Je vous remercie Monsieur le Président,

J’ai l'honneur de parler au nom d'un groupe de plus de 300 organisations (https://www.genevaforwesternsahara.org/members-miembros-membres) appelé Groupe de Soutien de Genève pour la Protection et la Promotion des Droits de l’Homme au Sahara occidental.

Monsieur le Haut-Commissaire,

Nous avons pris note avec satisfaction des préoccupations de votre Bureau concernant la situation des droits de l'homme dans le Territoire Non Autonome du Sahara occidental sous occupation et de votre surveillance à distance. Mais cela n'est clairement pas suffisant.

En effet, après la mission de votre Bureau en 2006, les Sahraouis ont dû attendre jusqu'en 2015 pour qu'une nouvelle mission se rende au Sahara Occidental occupé. La Puissance occupante ne peut pas continuer à interdire l'accès au Territoire afin d'assurer l'impunité des crimes commis contre les Sahraouis.

Les violations graves et systématiques du Droit International Humanitaire et des droits de l'homme commises par le Royaume du Maroc dans le Territoire Non Autonome du Sahara occidental nécessitent l'élaboration et la mise en œuvre de mesures indépendantes et crédibles pour assurer le plein respect des droits de l'homme, comme l'a demandé le Conseil de sécurité.

Alors que des scandales éclatent en Europe dans les milieux politiques et médiatiques en relation avec des actes suspects de corruption de la part du Royaume du Maroc, il serait sage pour la Puissance occupante de prendre au sérieux la demande du Conseil de sécurité et de coopérer pleinement avec le Bureau du Haut Commissaire.

Je vous remercie de votre attention.

8 mars 2023

******

Asamblea General
Consejo de Derechos Humanos
51º período de sesiones

Tema 2 - Informe anual del Alto Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Derechos Humanos

Debate general

Gracias Señor Presidente,

Tengo el honor de hablar en nombre de un grupo de más de 300 organizaciones (https://www.genevaforwesternsahara.org/members-miembros-membres) llamado Grupo de Apooyo de Ginebra para la Protección y la Promoción de los Derechos Humanos en el Sáhara occidental

Señor Alto Comisionado,

Tomamos nota con aprecio de la preocupación de su Oficina por la situación de los derechos humanos en el Territorio No Autónomo Ocupado del Sáhara Occidental y su vigilancia a distancia. Pero está claro que esto no es suficiente.

De hecho, tras la misión de su Oficina de 2006, los saharauis tuvieron que esperar hasta 2015 para que una nueva misión visitara el Sáhara Occidental ocupado. La Potencia ocupante no puede seguir impidiendo el acceso al Territorio para garantizar la impunidad de los crímenes cometidos contra los saharauis.

Las sistemáticas y graves violaciones del derecho internacional humanitario y de los derechos humanos cometidas por el Reino de Marruecos en el Territorio No Autónomo del Sáhara Occidental requieren el desarrollo y la aplicación de medidas independientes y creíbles que garanticen el pleno respeto de los derechos humanos, tal y como ha solicitado el Consejo de Seguridad.

A medida que estallan en Europa escándalos en círculos políticos y mediáticos en relación con sospechosos actos de corrupción por parte del Reino de Marruecos, sería prudente que la Potencia ocupante se tomara en serio la petición del Consejo de Seguridad y cooperara plenamente con la Oficina del Alto Comisionado

Agradecemos su atención.

8 de marzo de 2023

******

The following NGOs, without ECOSOC status, also share the view expressed in the statement:

Les ONG suivantes, sans statut ECOSOC, partagent également l’opinion exprimée dans la déclaration :

Las siguientes ONG sin estatus ECOSOC también comparten la opinión expresada en la declaración:

ACAT Nyonsais-Baronnies, Acció Solidària amb el Sàhara, Acción Solidaria Aragonesa (ASA), Africa Solidarity for Sahrawi, African Hungarian Unión, African Law Foundation (AFRILAW), Afrika Netzwerk Bremen e.V., Agrupación Chilena de Ex Presos poíticos, Alliance de l’Europe centrale et orientale de solidarité avec le peuple Sahraoui, American Peace Information Center, Amigos por un Sahara Libre, ARCI Città Visibili, A.R.S.P.S. - Rio de Oro, Artisans du Monde Vaison la Romaine / Pain et Liberté, Asocición ALOUDA de Amigos del pueblo saharaui de Altoaragón, Asociación Amal Centro Andalucía, Asociación Amal Nanclares, Asociación Amigos del Pueblo Saharaui del Campo de Gibraltar (FANDAS), Asociación Amigos del Pueblo Saharaui de Toledo, Asociación de Amigos y Amigas de la R.A.S.D. de Álava, Asociación de Amistad con el Pueblo Saharaui de Albacete, Asociación de Amistad con el Pueblo Saharaui de Sevilla, Asociación de Apoyo al Pueblo Saharaui de Jaén, Asociación ARDI HURRA, Asociación Asturiana de Solidaridad con el Pueblo Saharaui, Asociación Awlad El Mezna Murcia, Asociación Baha Malaga, Asociación Banat Saguia y Wad Dahab, Asociación Canaria de Amistad con el Pueblo Saharaui (ACAPS), Asociación Canaria de Solidaridad con el Pueblo Saharaui, Asociación Chilena de Amistad con la República Arabe Saharaui Democrática, Asociación Colombiana de Amistad con el Pueblo Saharaui, Asociación de la Comunidad Saharaui en Argon (ACSA), Asociación Concordia Tenerife, Asociación Convsol Amurrio, Asociación Cultural Peruano Saharaui, Asociación de Discapacitados Saharauis, Asociación Doctora Beituha, Asociación Ecuatoriana de Amistad con el Pueblo Saharaui (AEAPS), Asociación Enour, Asociación de Familiares de Presos y Desaparecidos Saharauis (AFAPREDESA), Asociación por la Justicia y los Derechos Humanos, Asociación de Médicos Saharaui en España, Asociación Mexicana de Amistad con la República Árabe Saharaui A.C. (AMARAS), Asociación Navarra de Amigos y Amigas de la R.A.S.D. (ANARASD), Asociación Navarra de Amigos y Amigas del Sahara (ANAS), Asociación Panameña Solidaria con la Causa saharaui (APASOCASA), Asociación Pro Derechos Humanos de España (APDHE), Asociación Profesional de Abogados Saharauis en España (APRASE), Asociación por la Protección de los Presos Saharaui en las Cárceles Marroquí, Asociación Rimal Sáhara-Tormes, Asociación Riojana de Amigos de la R.A.S.D., Asociación Sahara Euskadi Vitoria, Asociación Sahara Gasteiz Vitoria, Asociación Sahara Ihsan, Asociación Saharaui contra la Tortura, Asociación Saharaui para la Protección de los Derechos Humanos y los Recursos naturales, Asociación Saharaui para la Protección y Difusión del Patrimonio cultural Saharaui, Asociación de Saharauis en Alicante, Asociación de Saharauis en Ávila, Asociación de Saharauis en Bal, Asociación de Saharauis en Fuerteventura, Asociación de Saharauis en Grenada, Asociación de Saharauis en Jerez de la Frontera, Asociación de Saharauis en Lebrija, Asociación de Saharauis en Tenerife, Asociación de Saharauis en Valdepeñas, Asociación Sidemu Mojtar Estepona, Asociación Tawasol Lludio, Asociación Um Draiga de Zaragoza, Asociación Venezolana de Solidaridad con el Sáhara (ASOVESSA), Asociación de Víctimas de Minas (ASAVIM), Asociación de Zamur Valencia, Associação Amigos e Solidaridade ao Povo Saharaui (ASAHARA), Associação de Amizade Portugal - Sahara Ocidental (AAPSO), Associació d’Amics del Poble Sahrauí de les Iles Balears, Association des Amis de la RASD (France), Association de la Communauté Sahraouie en France, Association Culture Sahara, Association culturelle Sahraouie en France, Association des Femmes Sahraouies en France, Association Française d'Amitié et de Solidarité avec les Peuples d'Afrique (AFASPA), Association of Humanitarian Lawyers, Association for the Monitoring of Resources and for the Protection of the Environment in Western Sahara (AMRPENWS), Association pour un Référendum libre et régulier au Sahara occidental (ARSO), Association Sahara Matinba Bruxelles, Association Sahraouie des Victimes des Violations Graves des Droits de l’Homme Commises par l’Etat Marocain (ASVDH), Association des Sahraouis en Belgique, Association des Sahraouis de Bordeaux, Association des Sahraouis du Centre de la France, Association des Sahraouis de Les Mureaux, Association des Sahraouis de Mantes-la-Jolie, Association des Sahraouis de Montauban, Association des Sahraouis de Perigueux, Association pour la Sauvegarde de l'Environnement au Sahara occidental (ASESO), Association de Solidarité avec le Peuple Sahraoui (ASPS), Association de la Vie Maghrébine pour la Solidarité et le Développement (AVMSD), Associazione bambini senza confini, Associazione culturale "Cinema e diritti", Associazione Jaima Sahrawi per una soluzione giusta e non violenta nel Sahara Occ., Associazione Nazionale di Solidarietà con il Popolo Saharaui, Australia Western Sahara Association (AWSA), attac Hungarian, Bentili Media Center, Bremer Informationszentrum für Menschenrechte und Entwicklung (biz), Bureau International pour le Respect des Droits Humains au Sahara occidental (BIRDHSO), Campaña Saharaui para la sensibilisación sobre el peligro de Minas (SCBL), Cantabria por el Sáhara, Central Unitaria de Trabajadores de Chile, Centro Brasileiro de Solidaridad con los Pueblos y Lucha por la Paz, CEBRAPAZ, Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos “Segundo Montes Mozo S.J.” (CSMM), Centro Saharaui por la Salvaguardia de la Memoria, Colectivo Saharaui en Estepona, Colectivo Saharaui en Gipuzkoa, Colectivo Saharaui en Jaén, Colectivo Saharaui en Lanzarote, Collectif des Défenseurs Saharaouis des droits de l'homme (CODESA), Comisión Ecuménica de Derechos Humanos de Ecuador (CEDHU), Comisión General Justicia y Paz, Comisión Media Independientes, Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos de la República Dominicana (CNDH-RD), Comisión Nacional Saharaui por los Derechos Humanos (CONASADH), Comitato “Selma2.0”-odv, Comité d’Action et de Réflexion pour l’Avenir du Sahara Occidental, Comité de Amistad con el pueblo Saharaui – Argentina, Comité de Apoyo por el Plano de Paz y la Protección de los Recursos Naturales en el Sáhara Occidental, Comité Belge de soutien au Peuple Sahraoui, Comité de Defensa del Derecho de Autodeterminación (CODAPSO), Comité de Familiares de los 15 Jóvenes Secuestrados, Comité de Familiares de Mártires y Desaparecidos, Comité de Familiares de los Presos Políticos Saharauis, Comité de Jumelage et d'Echange Internationaux / Gonfreville l'Orcher, Comité de Protección de los Defensores Saharauis – Freedom Sun, Comité de Protección de los Recursos Naturales, Comité Saharaui de Defensa de Derechos Humanos (Glaimim), Comité Saharaui de Defensa de Derechos Humanos (Smara), Comité Saharaui de Defensa de Derechos Humanos (Zag), Comité Saharaui por el Monitereo de los Derechos Humanos (Assa), Comité de Solidaridad Oscar Romero, Comité de soutien au Plan de Résolution Onusien et pour la protection des Ressources Naturelles au Sahara Occidental, Comité Suisse de soutien au Peuple Sahraoui, Comité de Victimas de Agdaz y Magouna, Comunidad Saharaui en Aragón, Comunidad Saharaui en Asturias, Comunidad Saharaui en Balmaseda, Comunidad Saharaui en Cantabria, Comunidad Saharaui en Castilla y León, Comunidad Saharaui en Castilla la Mancha, Comunidad Saharaui en Catalunya, Comunidad Saharaui en Cordoba, Comunidad Saharaui en Jerez y Cadiz, Comunidad Saharaui en La Rioja, Comunidad Saharaui en Las Palmas, Comunidad Saharaui en Madrid, Comunidad Saharaui en Murcia, Comunidad Saharaui en Navarra, Coordinadora de Asociaciones de Solidaridad con el Pueblo Saharaui de la Provincia de Alicante, Coordinadora Estatal de Asociaciones Solidarias con el Sáhara (CEAS – Sáhara), Coordinadora de Gdeim Izik para un Movimiento Pacífico, Coordinadora de los Graduados Saharauis Desempleados, Coordinadora d´Organizacións No-Governamentals de Cooperaciò al Desenvolupament (CONGDIB), Coordinadora de las ONGs en Aaiún, Coordinadora Saharaui de Derechos Humanos de Tantan, Corriente Peronista Descamisados, Croatia Solidarity Committee with Western Sahara, Cultures of Resistence Network; Der Elefant e.V., Diaspora Saharaui en Bizkaia Disabi, Emmaus Åland, Emmaus Stockholm, Equipe Média, European Association of Lawyers for Democracy and World Human Rights (ELDH), Federació ACAPS de Catalunya, Federació d’Associacions de Solidaritat amb el Poble Sahrauí del País Valencià, Federación Andaluza de Asociaciones Solidarias con el Sahara (FANDAS), Federación de Asociaciones de Amigos del Pueblo Saharaui de Extremadura (FEDESAEX), Federación de la Comunidad de Madrid de Asociaciones Solidarias con el Sahara (FEMAS Sahara), Federación Deportistas Saharauis en España, Federación Estatal de Instituciones Solidarias con el Pueblo Saharaui (FEDISSAH), Federación Internacional Pro Derechos Humanos-España, Fédération sportive des Sahraouis en France, FEMAS – Madrid, Festival del cinema dei diritti umani di Napoli, Fondation Frantz Fanon, Forum Futuro de la Mujer Saharaui, Frauennetzwerk für Frieden e.V., Freiheit für die Westsahara e.V., Friends of Western Sahara Japan, Fundación Constituyente XXI, Fundación Mundubat, Fundación Sahara Libre-Venezuela, Fundación Sahara occidental - Portugal, Giuristi Democratici, Global Aktion - People & Planet before profit, Global Monitoring Center, Grace Initiative Global, Group of International Legal Intervention of the Center of Research and Elaboration on Democracy (CRED-GIGI), Groupe Non Violence Active (NOVA SAHARA OCCIDENTAL), Grupo por la renuncia de la Nacionalidad Marroquí, Haldane Society of Socialist Lawyers, Housing and Land Rights Network, Human & Environment e.V., Human Rights Defenders Solidarity Network Uganda, Hungarian Solidarity Committee with Western Sahara, Hungarian Universal Peace Federation, Ibsar Al Khair Association for the Disabled in Western Sahara, International Platform of Jurists for East Timor, Kabara Lagdaf, LESTIFTA - Amigos del Pueblo Saharaui de Teruel, Liga Argentina por los Derechos Humanos, Liga de Abogacia Saharaui en España, Liga de Defensa de los Presos Políticos Saharaui, Liga Española Pro derechos Humanos (LEPDH), Liga de Estudiantes Saharauis en España, Liga de Medicos Saharauis en España, Liga de Mujeres Saharauis en España, Liga Nacional dos Direitos Humanos, Liga de Periodistas Saharauis en España, Liga Saharaui de defensa de Derechos Humanos y Protección de RW-Bojador, Ligue des Jeunes et des Etudiants Sahraouis en France, Ligue pour la Protection des Prisonniers Sahraouis dans les prisons marocaines (LPPS), MAKSRA - Asociación de Amigos del Pueblo Saharaui de Segovia, Movimento Solidariedade Sahara Occidental em Timor-Leste, Movimiento Valenciano de Ayuda al Pueblo Saharaui, National Association of Democratic Lawyers (NADEL), National Lawyers Guild (U.S.), National Television Team, Neon Metin Media, Nigerian Movement for the Liberation of Western Sahara, Nomad SHRC, Norwegian Support Committee for Western Sahara, NOVACT- International Institute for Nonviolent Action, Nushatta Foundation for Media and Human Rights, Observatoire des Médias Saharaouis pour documenter les violations des droits de l’homme, Observatorio Aragonés para el Sáhara Occidental, Observatorio Asturiano de Derechos Humanos para el Sáhara Occidental (OAPSO), Observatorio Saharaui por el Niño y la Mujer, Observatorio Saharaui de Protección del Niño, Observatorio Saharaui de Recursos Naturales, 1514 Oltre il muro, Österreichisch Saharauische Gesellschaft, Organización Contra la Tortura en Dakhla, Organización Saharaui por la Defensa de las libertades y la dignidad, Pallasos en Rebeldía y Festiclown, Partido Humanista Peruano, Plataforma de Organizaciones Chile Mejor Sin TLC, Polish Solidarity Committee with Western Sahara, Por un Sahara Libre, Proyecto Audiovisual: La Saharaui Colombiana, Resistencia Nacional Estudante de Timor-Leste (RENETIL), Rete Saharawi - Solidarietà italiana con il popolo saharawi ODV, Saharaui Unterstützungsverein Wien, Saharawi Advocacy Campaign, Sahrauische Diaspora in Deutschland, Saharawi Association for Persons with Disabilities in Western Sahara, Saharawi Association in the USA (SAUSA), Saharawi Campaign against the Plunder (SCAP), Saharawi Center for Media and Communication, Saharawi Media Team, Saharawi Voice, Sahrawis förening i Sverige, Salma e.V., Sandblast Arts, Schweizerisches Unterstützungskomitee für die Sahraouis Bern, Sindacato Español Comisiones Obrearas (CCOO), Slovenian Solidarity Committee with Western Sahara, Solidariedade Galega col Pobo Saharaui (SOGAPS), Stichting Zelfbeschikking West-Sahara, Tayuch Amurio, terre des homme schweiz, The Campaign to End the Moroccan Occupation of Western Sahara, The Icelandic Western Sahara Association, The Norwegian organization for justice and development, The Swedish Western Sahara Committee, TIRIS - Associazione di Solidarietà con il Popolo Saharawi, Uganda Solidarity Movement with Western Sahara, Ukrainian Association of Democratic Lawyers, UNAFRAID art publication; Unión de Asociaciones Solidarias con el Sáhara de Castilla y León, Union des Ingénieurs Sahraouis, Unión de Juristas Saharauis (UJS), Unión Nacional de Abogados Saharauis, Unión Nacional de Estudiantes de Saguia El Hamra y Rio de Oro (UESARIO), Unión Nacional de la Juventud de Saguia El Hamra y Rio de Oro (UJSARIO), Unión Nacional de Mujeres Saharauis (UNMS), Unión Nacional de Trabajadores de Saguia El Hamra y Rio de Oro (UGTSARIO), Unión de Periodistas y Escritores Saharauis (UPES), US Western Sahara Foundation, VZW de Vereniging van de Sahrawi Gemeenschap in Belgie, Werken Rojo - Medio de comunicación digital, Western Sahara Times, ZEOK e.V. – Zentrum für Europäische und Orientalische Kultur from Leipzig.

Click here to download the full statement in English, French and Spanish.

---

Learn more about the Geneva Support Group here.

On March 1st the Supporting Group organized a high-level conference on   "The application of Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights to Western Sahara".

You can watch the recording of the event here. 

IFOR speak up at the UN Human Rights Council in the Gereal Debate with the High Commissioner for Human Rights

On March 7th the new UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Mr. Volker Türk presented at the 52nd session of the UN Human Rights Council the annual report and specific reports on Colombia, Guatemala, Honduras and Cyprus.

Following the Member and Observer Member States statements, on March 8th IFOR took the floor as 10th NGO speaker and addressed issues related to Colombia and Tibet, where IFOR's affiliates are engaging for peace and human rights. The statement listed several concerning issues including "people on the move" whose death we constantly witness in all migration routes from the Mediterranean to Central America. IFOR also spoke up on Western Sahara and Occupied Palestinian Territories.

The statement highlighted also the issue of justice and peace and of war and the human right to conscientious objection to military service. IFOR denounced the imprisonment of Ukrainian conscientious objector Vitaly Alekseenko and mentioned the Object War Campaigned launched last September.

---

Human Rights Council, 52nd Session

7 th March 2023

GD Item 2: Annual report of the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights and reports of the OHCHR

Oral statement delivered by the International Fellowship of Reconciliation.

Mr. President, High Commissioner,

IFOR recognizes the current efforts of the government of Colombia to end the armed conflicts [in Colombia] and implement the peace accords and total peace policies. The implementation of comprehensive protection policies for communities and leaders remain urgent [as well as the fight against corruption at all levels and against any complicity with organised crime to ensure a comprehensive peace with human rights guarantees].

International support and solidarity is crucial to overcome global challenges. Vice President Francia Marquez suggests an international debt cut as an "exchange" for the slave labour of Afro-Colombians for centuries, [President Gustavo Petro a swap of oxygen production by rain forest protection with foreign debts. Foreign debts pressure the Colombian government and tighten the budget for a full implementation of the peace agreement, “total peace policies” and accompanying human rights protection strategies].

There is no Peace without Justice.

Dramatically, around the world war is still the preferred tool to address international conflicts. We express our solidarity to all victims of war.

We stand with all those who refuse to kill. [The right to conscientious objection to military service is a human right inherent to the right to freedom of thought conscience and religion.] This human right is constantly undermined and conscientious objectors jailed just as Vitaly Alekseenko some days ago in Ukraine.

In September 2021 IFOR launched the Object War Campaign together with its partners [War Resisters’ International, European Bureau for Conscientious Objection (EBCO) and Connection e.V] to appeal for protection for conscientious objectors fleeing their countries [because their life is at risk for their refusal to bear weapons].

IFOR is also deeply concerned about OPT (Occupied Palestinian Territories) and the continuing systematic violations of human rights in the Non-Self-Governing Territory of Western Sahara, [occupied by the Kingdom of Morocco,] where independent human rights mechanism access is blocked.

Occupants and occupied cannot be considered on the same level. In the Tibet region, the [Tibetan] political prisoners and detainees continue to die or remain missing with impunity and no accountability.

One sentence about people on the move: their death is our responsibility in too many ways.

IFOR reminds this Council of the impact of its work on the life of human beings worldwide.

Thank you.

---

Click here to download the full statement.

Click here to watch IFOR Main representative to the UN, Ms. Z. Zafarana, delivering the statement in the plenary.

---

INSIGHTS

Read here more about the new UN High Commissioner for Human Rights

Read here about High Commissioner report on Colombia, Guatemale, Honduras, Cyprus

Read here the full report of the HCHR on Colombia.

Read here about the High Commissioner annual report

Here you can find all reports presented at the 52nd session of the UN Human Rights Council. 

IFOR speaks at the UN on the violation of the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion in Eritrea

On Monday March 6th the UN Human Rights Council, in its 13th meeting, addressed the issue of human rights in Eritrea.

The UN Deputy High Commissioner Ms. Nada Al-Nashif presented her report followed by the UN Special Rapporteur Mr. Mohamed Abdelsalam Babiker.

Reports state no signs of improvement in the country. One of the issues raised as linked to the many human rights violations registered in the country is the Indefinite National Service.

---

Human Rights Council, 52 nd Session

6 th March 2023 Item 2: Enhanced interactive dialogue on the situation of human rights in Eritrea.

Oral statement delivered by the International Fellowship of Reconciliation.

Mr. Vice President,

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation (IFOR) thanks all the speakers for their presentations1 and expresses serious concerns regarding the situation of human rights in Eritrea.

The ongoing conflict in Ethiopia’s Tigray region is increasing the alarm once more on human rights violations by Eritrean forces, as recently reported by Human Rights Watch : mass roundups and repression in the context of an intensive forced conscription campaign. Relatives of draft evaders or deserters have been punished and arrested.

We also restate the concern regarding Eritrean migrants and refugees who often flee from the system of an indefinite National Service which presents practices that in many cases amount to forced labour.

We call on the international community to protect refugees and to withdraw from practices which reinforce such a system.

We are also concerned about the persecution of religious leaders such as the Eritrean Catholic Bishop Fikremariam Hagos, arrested at the Asmara airport last October. More recently Human Rights Concerns - Eritrea reported that the Eritrean monk Yeneta Ezra, has been found dead at his monastery residence in February.

We urge this Council to ensure the protection of human rights in Eritrea, including the human right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion within which is also inherent the human right to conscientious objection to military service. And facilitate the engagement of Eritrea with the OHCHR.

Thank you.

---

Click here to download the full statement.

Click here to watch the Main representative of IFOR deliver the statement in the plenary.

Read here more about the interactive dialogue on Eritrea.

Learn more about the Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in Eritrea here.

Here you can find all reports presented at the 52nd session of the UN Human Rights Council.

Read here the full statement by the UN Deputy High Commissioner.

JOINT PUBLIC STATEMENT about Greek conscientious objector THOMAS KATSAROS

3 March 2023 Index: EUR 25/6508/2023

GREECE: GIVE THOMAS KATSAROS A FAIR EXAMINATION OF HIS GROUNDS FOR CONSCIENTIOUS OBJECTION UNDER AN AMENDED LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK IN LINE WITH INTERNATIONAL LAW AND STANDARDS

Ahead of the hearing on 6 March 2023, before the Council of State, Greece’s Supreme Administrative Court, of the case of Thomas Katsaros, whose application for the status of conscientious objector to military service has been rejected by the Minister of National Defence, Amnesty International, Connection e.V., the European Bureau for Conscientious Objection (EBCO), the International Fellowship of Reconciliation (IFOR) and War Resisters’ International (WRI) call on the Greek authorities to annul the decision of rejection and grant him a fair examination of his grounds for conscientious objection under an amended legislative framework in line with international and regional human rights law and standards and the recommendations of domestic human rights bodies.

Thomas Katsaros applied in May 2022 for conscientious objector status, requesting to instead perform the (punitive) alternative civilian service. His application was based on his ideological pacifist beliefs.

His application was rejected in August 2022 by the Minister of National Defence, after a recommendation by the special committee which has military participation, on the grounds that in their view from the submitted documentation “it is not inferred that the claimed conscientious grounds stem from a specific ideology, philosophical, religious or political”, preventing him from fulfilling his military duties in arms.

Thomas Katsaros submitted an appeal to the Minister of National Defence in September 2022.

However, due to the delay in receiving a response for such appeal, and the risk to miss the deadline for judicial appeal, in November 2022 he also submitted a judicial appeal to the Council of State, the Supreme Administrative Court. Throughout the years, there is a pattern of delay of response of the Minister of National Defence to appeals of rejected applicants, which entails for claimants of conscientious objection a risk of missing the deadline for judicial appeal.

Thomans Katsaros’s initial appeal was rejected by the same Minister of National Defence in January 2023, after a recommendation by a subsequent special committee which also has military participation in the panel.

The case of Thomas Katsaros illustrates two of the most problematic aspects of the legislation and practice concerning the right to conscientious objection in Greece: the lack of independence and impartiality of the procedures of examination of applications for conscientious objector status, and the discrimination faced by certain groups of conscientious objectors on the basis of the nature of their beliefs.

The expert organisations authoring this statement have analysed the case of Thomas Katsaros, against the applicable national law and practice on the basis of international law and standards and the recommendation of international and domestic bodies. They have found that the inadequate procedure of examination of applications for recognition of conscientious objectors is resulting in violations of his human rights including the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Furthermore, the unequal treatment of conscientious objectors on the basis of the nature of their beliefs grounded on conscience may give rise to a violation of Thomas Katsaros’s right to equality before the law and equal protection under the law without any discrimination.

A. LEGISLATION AND PRACTICE IN GREECE

The final decision on applications for granting conscientious objector status is taken exclusively by one person, the Minister of National Defence, after a non-binding recommendation of a five-member Special Committee consisting of a military officer, three university professors and one member of the State's Legal Council acting as president. The members of the Committee are appointed by a Joint Decision of the Minister of National Defence, along with the Minister of Economy and Finance and the Minister of Education.

In practice, the Committee does not summon baptised Jehovah’s Witnesses having a certificate from their church, who are automatically granted conscientious objector status. This approach is the best practice according to OHCHR, the Human Rights Council and the only appropriate practice according to the European Parliament. However, the Committee does not apply this to all conscientious objectors and summons those citing other religious grounds or ideological (non-religious) grounds for their conscientious objection. This differentiation has been considered by the Greek Ombudsman as “a standard practice of unequal treatment”.

According to official figures, in 2021 the percentage of recognition by the Minister of National Defence of conscientious objectors invoking religious grounds was 99% while the percentage of recognition of conscientious objectors invoking ideological grounds was 0%. The considerable difference between the grounds to grant contentious objector status raises concerns over the state’s duty not to discriminate between conscientious objectors on the basis of the nature of their particular beliefs.

While a person whose application has been rejected has a right to appeal to the Minister of National Defence to change the decision, in practice, the appeal is examined by the same Committee, which recommends again to the Minister. Another possibility for appeal is to the Council of State, that is the Supreme Administrative Court.

B. PROCEDURES AND COMPOSITION OF THE BODY RESPONSIBLE FOR ASSESSING THE APPLICATIONS

International standards and recommendations of international bodies:

• The Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe, has set specific basic principles as for the procedure: Where the decision regarding the recognition of the right of conscientious objection is taken in the first instance by an administrative authority, the decision-taking body shall be entirely separate from the military authorities and its composition shall guarantee maximum independence and impartiality; the decision shall be subject to control by at least one other administrative body, composed likewise in the manner prescribed above, and subsequently to the control of at least one independent judicial body; it should be ensured that objections and judicial appeals have the effect of suspending the armed service call-up order until the decision regarding the claim has been rendered; applicants should be granted a hearing and should also be entitled to be represented and to call relevant witnesses.

• The then UN Special Rapporteur on religious intolerance, since many years had set the relevant standards: “The decision concerning their status should be made, when possible, by an impartial tribunal set up for that purpose or by a regular civilian court, with the application of all the legal safeguards provided for in international human rights instruments. There should always be a right to appeal to an independent, civilian judicial body. The decision-making body should be entirely separate from the military authorities and the conscientious objector should be granted a hearing, and be entitled to legal representation and to call relevant witnesses.” The same standards continue to be cited by the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief as named now and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).

• The OHCHR has determined that “Independent and impartial decision-making bodies should determine whether a conscientious objection to military service is genuinely held in a specific case. Such bodies should be placed under the full control of civilian authorities”. In the same report, the OHCHR has set up several minimum criteria so that application procedures are in line with international human rights norms and standards. The OHCHR has also cited acceptance of applications without inquiry as a best practice.

• Already since 1998, the then UN Commission on Human Rights has welcomed the fact that some States accept claims of conscientious objection as valid without inquiry. The same has been repeated by its successor, the UN Human Rights Council.

• The European Parliament has repeatedly pointed out that “no court or commission can penetrate the conscience of an individual” and has favoured the position that a declaration setting out the grounds should suffice for somebody to be recognized as a conscientious objector.

Recommendations of international and Greek bodies specifically to Greece

Greece has received numerous recommendations, even after the amendment of the legislation in 2019, which reduced the number of military officers in the special committee from two to one.

• The European Court of Human Rights, in the Papavasilakis’ case, condemned Greece for violation of Article 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights (concerning the freedom of thought, conscience and religion). The Court stressed that the independence of the members of the competent body constitutes one of the fundamental conditions for the effectiveness of the examination of a case of a conscientious objector. The Court highlighted that the special committee had examined the case of the claimant in the presence of three – out of a total of five – members, with two of them being military officers, which resulted in the military being the majority. It has also pointed out that in this case, the fact that the final decision has been taken by the Minister of National Defence does not afford the requisite guarantees of impartiality and independence.

• The UN Human Rights Committee in 2005 had expressed its concern for the fact that the examination of applications was solely under the control of the Ministry of Defence, and had recommended Greece to consider placing the assessment of applications for conscientious objector status under the control of civilian authorities. The Committee, indirectly but clearly, found that the Ministry of National Defence is not a civilian authority, and has expressed similar positions in the case of Russia too. Ten years later, it expressed its concerns, about, among other things, “the composition of the Special Committee and its reported lack of independence and impartiality”, and recommended Greece to “consider placing the assessment of applications for conscientious objector status under the full control of civilian authorities”. Furthermore, in its recent views on the Petromelidis v. Greece case, the Committee has reiterated that Greece “should review its legislation with a view to ensuring the effective guarantee of the right to conscientious objection under article 18 (1) of the Covenant”.

• The Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe has explicitly recommended to Greece the “transfer of administrative responsibilities as regards granting conscientious objector status from the Ministry of Defence to an independent civilian department”.

• The UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, since 2006, has adopted and stressed the recommendations of the UN Human Rights Committee to Greece, to consider placing the assessment of applications for conscientious objector status under the control of civilian authorities. In 2016, the UN Special Rapporteur highlighted the case of a rejected applicant, asked for him to be examined by an independent and impartial body, repeated the recommendations of the Human Rights Committee and urged the Greek authorities “that all necessary interim measures be taken to halt the alleged violations and prevent their re-occurrence and in the event that the investigations support or suggest the allegations to be correct, to ensure the accountability of any person(s) responsible for the alleged violations”. In July 2019, after the amendment of the legislation which reduced the number of military members in the special committee, the UN Special Rapporteur referred to the “the recently adopted law (4609/2019), which regrettably fails to recognize the status of conscientious objectors (COs) to military service in accordance with international human rights standards”. The Rapporteur also noted that “The assessment procedure remains unchanged”, and referred to the recommendations of the Human Rights Committee, pointing out that “the assessment of applications for conscientious objector status should be within the jurisdiction of civilian authorities”.

• The UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) in 2017 has highlighted the concerns and recommendations of the Human Rights Committee, and the ECtHR judgement. In 2019, the OHCHR has explicitly stated about the bill (law 4609/2019) that it “remains problematic, given that, despite the new composition of the five-membered special committee with the inclusion of only one military officer (rather than of two), the assessment of applications for conscientious objections status is still not under the full control of civilian authorities”.

• The Greek Ombudsman has stated: “The personal interview as a mean to ascertain reasons of conscience is controversial per se, insofar it submits an internal esprit to an examination of sincerity”.

• The Greek National Commission for Human Rights has repeatedly recommended: “The competent authority deciding whether a person should be assigned to an alternative service or not, must be independent and should not include members of the military administration”. In 2019, commenting on the bill (now law 4609/2019), the GNCHR, explicitly stated that despite the reduction of the military officers the bill does not fully comply with the recommendations of monitoring bodies such as the Human Rights Committee, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief and the Commissioner for Human Rights of the Council of Europe. In 2021, in its submission for the 3rd Cycle of UPR, the GNCHR has reiterated that “The assessment of applications for conscientious objector status is still not placed under the full control of civilian authorities”.
  

Breaches:

The expert organizations authoring this statement conclude that because of the inadequate procedure of examination of applications for recognition of conscientious objectors, there is a violation of the right to freedom of thought, conscience, religion and belief, as set out in Article 18 of the ICCPR, as well as Article 9 of the ECHR.

The current legislation on the examination of applications for alternative service continues to be in contravention of the recommendations of the UN Human Rights Committee by not requiring the new Special Committee to be wholly civilian and ensuring that the decision of granting conscientious objector status is not made by the Minister of Defence.

C. DISCRIMINATION BASED ON DIFFERENT GROUNDS OF OBJECTION

International standards and recommendations of international bodies:

• The OHCHR has compiled the minimum criteria in order for the procedures for conscientious objector status to be in line with international human rights law and standards. Among them, there is the requirement for: “Non- discrimination on the basis of the grounds for conscientious objection and between groups. Alternative service arrangements should be accessible to all conscientious objectors without discrimination as to the nature of their religious or non-religious beliefs; there should be no discrimination between groups of conscientious objectors.”

• The Human Rights Committee, in its General Comment 22, has stated that “there shall be no differentiation among conscientious objectors on the basis of the nature of their particular beliefs”. Subsequently, the Committee, in the context of its concluding observations, has consistently advocated for recognition of “the right to conscientious objection to military service without discrimination as to the nature of the beliefs (religious or non-religious beliefs grounded in conscience) justifying the objection”,39 or “without limitation on the category of conscientiously held beliefs”, and has expressed concerns “about the limiting of conscientious objection to military service only to members of registered religious organizations whose teaching prohibits the use of arms”.

• The Human Rights Council has reminded states of “the requirement not to discriminate between conscientious objectors on the basis of the nature of their particular beliefs”.
  
  

Recommendations of international and Greek human rights bodies specifically to Greece

• The Human Rights Committee, specifically in the case of Greece, has expressed concerns about “reports indicating discrimination on the basis of different grounds of objection to service” and has recommended that the alternative service should be “accessible to all conscientious objectors”. The Committee has recently referred to its previous concluding observations in the “List of issues prior to submission of the third periodic report of Greece” and asked Greece to “report on the measures taken to provide all conscientious objectors with an alternative to military service” (emphasis added). 

• In the context of the Second Cycle of Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR), Greece received a recommendation asking inter alia for the alternative service to be “accessible to all conscientious objectors”. Greece did not accept the recommendation. In the context of the Third Cycle of Human Rights Council’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR), Greece received a similar recommendation asking inter alia for “an alternative service to military service to which all conscientious objectors have access to”. Greece accepted the recommendation this time, which is yet to be implemented.

• The OHCHR has highlighted both the Human Rights Committee’s concerns as well those of the Greek Ombudsman (see below) and the fact that Greece has rejected the recommendations about conscientious objectors in the context of UPR.

• In 2016, the UN Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief, referred to information received that the special committee “repeatedly rejects applicants who do not belong to the Jehova[h]’s Witnesses denomination”. In 2019, the UN Special Rapporteur referred to the concerns of the Human Rights Committee, stating that the recognition of the status of conscientious objector should not be executed in a discriminatory manner based on different application grounds.

• The Greek Ombudsman has referred to “a continuous practice of unequal treatment: while for the so called “religious” objectors the committee is satisfied by the submission of the certificate of the relevant religious community and do not even summon them to an interview, the so called “ideological” objectors are often required to answer to questions concerning sensitive personal data, as for example the affiliation to a specific political tendency (cases 165151, 167596, 168243/2013).”

Breaches:

The expert organizations authoring this statement conclude that unequal treatment of conscientious objectors on the basis of the nature of their beliefs is a form of discrimination that constitutes a violation of Article 26 of the ICCPR, that entitles all persons to equality before the law and equal protection of the law without any discrimination.

D. RECOMMENDATIONS

Amnesty International, Connection e.V, the European Bureau for Conscientious Objection, the International Fellowship of Reconciliation and War Resisters’ International make the following recommendations to the Greek authorities:

• Annul the ministerial decision of rejection of the application of Thomas Katsaros and other similar cases of conscientious objectors claiming their rights and grant them a right to a fair examination of their grounds for conscientious objection protected and upheld under an amended legislative framework in line with international and regional human rights law and standards and the recommendations of domestic human rights bodies.

• Transfer the procedure of examination of applications for conscientious objector status under the full control of civilian authorities (i.e. to be transferred entirely away from the Ministry of National Defence) by a panel with a wholly civilian composition. The procedure should be conducted without delay and in a way that guarantees maximum independence and impartiality.

• Accept claims of conscientious objection as valid without inquiry, in accordance with the best practice set out by UN and regional bodies.

• Take immediate action in addition to the above to ensure compliance with the requirement not to discriminate between conscientious objectors on the basis of the nature of their particular beliefs.

Click here to download the statement

IFOR joins statement on the Right to Development at the 52nd session of the UN Human Rights Council

On monday February 27th the Human Rights Council started its 52nd session in Geneva. General Secretary Antonio Guterrez opened the high level segment of the session.

On February 28th an high level panel discussion on the Right to Development took place and IFOR joined a statement delivered by Associazione Papa Giovani XXIII.

---

Check against delivery

Mr. President,

The Declaration on the Right to Development provides an essential guide to the manner

in which States, the international community and all organs of society shall act and

cooperate to ensure an enabling environment for development that is sustainable, just,

equitable and inclusive.

Nowadays, inequality has worsened to the point of becoming a threat to our societies

undermining progress in the fight against poverty and endangering the future of our

planet. Crisis after crisis the long-term structural gaps have widened and consolidated.

The implementation of the right to development and the embrace of the principle of

international solidarity are of paramount importance and inescapable ways to reduce the

many inequalities that threaten fundamental human rights, in particular for those who

are marginalised and poor.

APG23 and the co-signing NGOs look forward to the prompt finalisation and adoption

of a convention on the right to development, convinced that this will be a further

important step for the implementation of such a vital right.

We regret that some States are still reluctant to fully recognise the right to development

in all its dimensions and/or promote its realization.

Once and for all, the time has come to free the right to development from the trap of the

political games as well as the tendency to cherry-pick its contents and let it fly!

Thank You!

Click here to download the statement.

Webinar #2 "Conscientious Objection in times of War: Russia, Belarus and Ukraine"

The webinar series launched last month on “Conscientious objection to military service in times of war” continues with a new session focusing on the war in Ukraine.

---

Cliquez ici pour lire en français

Haga clic aquí para leer en español

---

Webinar #2 will take place on March 3rd  at 2pm Geneva/ 3pm Kyiv / 4pm Moscow time and will host campaigners on conscientious objection from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine.

Interpretation will be provided in English, Spanish, French, Russian.

How can we support conscientious objectors and deserters from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine?
The war in Ukraine has raged for a year now, and there is little hope that it will end soon. The death toll and the destruction rise daily. Russia is unwilling to end its attack and withdraw, and is pumping more and more troops into Ukraine. There is an ongoing risk of Belarus’ active involvement in the war. Meanwhile, the Western countries support Ukraine in its defence by continuing to send more and more heavy weapons. Calls for negotiations and cease-fires remain unheard.
Conscientious objectors refusing to take part in this war is our hope for peace. Since the beginning of the war, we have witnessed hundreds of thousands of people on all sides fleeing their countries and refusing to participate in this war.
#ObjectWarCampaign

Our support for conscientious objectors and deserters is vital for peace!
On March 3rd, we will hear from campaigners for peace from Russia, Belarus and Ukraine about the situation of conscientious objectors in their countries and how we can support them.

Speakers
In this webinar, we will hear from
Elena Popovka (Movement of Conscientious Objectors, Russia)
Olga Karatch (Our House, Belarus)
Yurii Sheliazhenko (Ukrainian Pacifist Movement, Ukraine)

Registration
This event is free however registration is required.
Please use the link here to register.

This is an event organised by International Fellowship of Reconciliation and War Resisters’ International in collaboration with Connection e.V. and is taking place on the occasion of the 52nd session of the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva.

Pass along the word
Read more about our previous Webinar #1 here.

We are looking forward to meeting you on March 3rd!

International organizations call for action against forced mobilization and to support conscientious objectors and deserters in Russia and Ukraine

22 February 2023

In the framework of the #ObjectWarCampaign (Russia, Belarus, Ukraine: Protection and asylum for deserters and conscientious objectors to military service), the International Fellowship of Reconciliation (IFOR), War Resisters’ International (WRI), the European Bureau for Conscientious Objection (EBCO), and Connection e.V. (Germany), call for actions at the Ukrainian and Russian embassies from the 23rd to the 27th of February 2023 to protest against the forced mobilisation and to express solidarity with Ukrainian and Russian conscientious objectors and deserters.

The four organisations denounce all the cases of forced and even violent recruitment to the armies of both sides, as well as all the cases of persecution of conscientious objectors and deserters.

The organisations highlight the case of 46-year-old Christian conscientious objector Vitaly Alekseenko who was convicted to one-year imprisonment sentence by the Ivano-Frankivsk Appeal Court on 16 January 2023 for refusing call up to the military on conscientious grounds. "I told the court I agree that I have broken the law of Ukraine," Alekseenko told Forum 18, "but I am not guilty under the law of God." Ivano-Frankivsk police told him "to be ready to be taken to prison" on 20 February 2023.

The four organisations consider the conviction of conscientious objector Vitaly Alekseenko a blatant violation of his right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, guaranteed under Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which is non-derogable in time of public emergency, according to Article 4.2 of ICCPR.

The organisations express their full solidarity with Vitaly Alekseenko and urge the Ukrainian authorities to drop all charges against him immediately. The organisations underline that his conviction occurs in the context that Ukraine has suspended the right of conscientious objection in the current emergency and call for the relevant decree to be immediately reversed.

The organisations also recall their strong condemnation of the Russian invasion of the Ukraine, and call on the soldiers not to participate in hostilities and on all recruits to refuse military service. They also demand Russia to stop prosecuting and release all anti-war protestors who non-violently oppose their government's war of aggression against Ukraine. The organisations as well as call on the Belarusian government to restrain from participation in and complicity with this war.

The Ukrainian, Russian and Belarusian governments should safeguard the right to conscientious objection to military service, including in wartime, fully complying with the European and international standards, amongst others the standards set by the European Court of Human Rights. Moreover, Ukraine is member of the Council of Europe and needs to continue to respect the European Convention of Human Rights. As now Ukraine becomes candidate to join the European Union, it will need to respect the Human Rights as defined in the EU Treaty, and the jurisprudence of the EU Court of Justice, which include the right of conscientious objection to military service.

Furthermore, the organisations emphasize that thousands of men and women on all sides are trying to flee their countries to evade the crimes of war. They are all our hope for overcoming violence. Therefore, the European Union should grant protection and asylum to all deserters and conscientious objectors! The Union should urge the Ukrainian government to stop persecuting conscientious objectors to military service and to guarantee them a full right to conscientious objection! And the European Union should open the borders to those who oppose war at great personal risk in their country!

Click here to download the press release

---

INSIGHTS

More info to Vitaly Alkeseenko: UKRAINE: Conscientious objector told "to be ready to be taken to prison" - Forum 18, 15/02/2023

Photo: Vitaly Alekseenko, Copyright: Vitaly Alekseenko

#ObjectWarCampaign: Russia, Belarus, Ukraine: Protection and asylum for deserters and conscientious objectors to military service

Contact persons:

• Alexia Tsouni, European Bureau for Conscientious Objection (EBCO), ebco@ebco-beoc.org, www.ebco-beoc.org (English, Greek)

• Semih Sapmaz, War Resisters’ International (WRI), semih@wri-irg.org, www.wri-irg.org (English, Turkish)

• Zaira Zafarana, International Fellowship of Reconciliation (IFOR), zaira.zafarana@ifor.org, www.ifor.org (English, Italian)

• Rudi Friedrich, Connection e.V., office@Connection-eV.org, www.Connection-eV.org (English, German)

The European Bureau for Conscientious Objection (EBCO) was founded in Brussels in 1979 as an umbrella structure for national associations of conscientious objectors in the European countries to promote the right to conscientious objection to preparations for, and participation in, war and any other type of military activity as a fundamental human right. EBCO enjoys participatory status with the Council of Europe since 1998 and is a member of its Conference of International Non-Governmental Organisations since 2005. EBCO is entitled to lodge collective complaints concerning the European Social Charter of the Council of Europe since 2021. EBCO provides expertise and legal opinions on behalf of the Directorate General of Human Rights and Legal Affairs of the Council of Europe. EBCO is involved in drawing up the annual report of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs of the European Parliament on the application by the Member States of its resolutions on conscientious objection and civilian service, as determined in the “Bandrés Molet & Bindi Resolution” of 1994. EBCO is a full member of the European Youth Forum since 1995.

War Resisters' International (WRI) was founded in London in 1921 as a global network of grassroots organisations, groups and individuals working together for a world without war. WRI remains committed to its founding declaration that 'War is a crime against humanity. I am therefore determined not to support any kind of war, and to strive for the removal of all causes of war'. Today WRI is a global pacifist and antimilitarist network with over 90 affiliated groups in 40 countries. WRI facilitates mutual support, by linking people together through publications, events and actions, initiating nonviolent campaigns that actively involve local groups and individuals, supporting those who oppose war and who challenge its causes, and promoting and educating people about pacifism and nonviolence. WRI runs three programmes of work that are important to the network: The Right to Refuse to Kill Programme, the Nonviolence Programme, and Countering the Militarisation of Youth.

The International Fellowship of Reconciliation (IFOR) was founded in 1914 in response to the horrors of war in Europe, and has taken a consistent stance against war and its preparation throughout its history. Today IFOR has branches, groups, and affiliates in over 40 countries on all continents, while the International Secretariat is located in the Netherlands. IFOR’s membership includes adherents of all the major spiritual traditions as well as those who have other spiritual sources for their commitment to nonviolence. IFOR has observer and consultative status to the United Nations ECOSOC and UNESCO organisations. IFOR maintains permanent representatives in Geneva, New York and Vienna and at the UNESCO in Paris who regularly participate in conferences and meetings of UN bodies, providing testimony and expertise from different regional perspectives, promoting non-violent alternatives in the fields of human rights, development, and disarmament.

Connection e.V. was founded in 1993 as an association advocating a comprehensive right to conscientious objection at an international level. The organisation is based in Offenbach, Germany, and collaborates with groups opposing war, conscription and the military in Europe and beyond, extending to Turkey, Israel, the U.S., Latin America and Africa. Connection e.V. demands that conscientious objectors from war regions should get asylum, and offers counseling and information to refugees and support for their self-organisation.