Supreme Court publishes decision on refusal of service due to religion

The right to alternative service is granted to citizens if fulfilling military duty contradicts their religious beliefs. Photo: UNIAN

The Supreme Court has published an overview of the current judicial practice of the Cassation Criminal Court for June 2024. One of the issues addressed was the refusal of mobilization due to religion. According to UNIAN, it was established that refusal of service by a person belonging to a religious organization constitutes evasion of mobilization.

“Since the constitutional duty to defend the Fatherland during service by those with such religious beliefs does not necessarily require taking up arms, but encompasses a wide range of opportunities to protect the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the state from military aggression by a foreign state, such as repairing equipment, building fortifications, evacuating the wounded, transporting goods, and performing other functions not related to the use of weapons,” the court explained.

The Cassation Criminal Court noted that in accordance with the provisions of the Law of Ukraine "On Alternative (Non-Military) Service", the right to alternative service is granted to citizens if fulfilling military duty contradicts their religious beliefs and these citizens belong to religious organizations whose teachings do not permit the use of weapons.

There are numerous court cases where people have been punished for refusing to join the army due to religious reasons. In the Lviv region, a man who passed a military medical commission but did not appear at the Territorial Recruitment Center was sentenced to three years in prison. The TRC stated that the citizen did not apply for alternative service.

In the Khmelnytskyi region, a man decided to evade mobilization by starting to attend the 'Jehovah's Witnesses' church. However, since he was not a member, he also received a three-year sentence in court.

As the UOJ previously reported, the Theological Commission of the UOC expressed its opinion on the issue of mobilization.

Lexo gjithashtu