The current redaction of the Law on National Defence Service (VAD) has many problems, including risks for human rights, as concluded by ombudsman Juris Jansons.
The ombudsman agrees that the goal of the law is securing the necessary number of personnel, which is highly important under the current geopolitical situation. At the same time, the ombudsman agrees with what was said by Saeima’s Legal Affairs Office at the 28 September meeting of the Defence, Internal Affairs and Corruption Prevention Committee – that currently the legislative draft includes many unresolved legal and conceptual issues that may impact the content of the legislative draft.
Because these topics are not addressed in the legislative draft’s annotation and that the legislative draft itself was viewed urgently, the ombudsman believes the risk of possible human rights violations.
According to the ombudsman, the text of the legislative draft is unclear and contains many contradictions, adding that it would be too soon to propose new legislative proposals.
The ombudsman wants the Saeima to pay attention to human rights violation risks. He urges the parliament to keep that in mind when deciding on the legislative draft.
The ombudsman turns attention towards multiple issues.
The legislative draft states that VAD mainly applies to men. The ombudsman believes there has not been a comprehensive discussion of such a model, especially considering the close ties VAD has to different services mentioned in the legislative draft.
A clear VAD concept would help better understand the goals and find explanations for different approaches for different genders.
It is also necessary to resolve many other conceptual problems that affect the content of VAD, the ombudsman says.
First of all, it is necessary to clearly outline if a person has the right to pick civil service instead of VAD.
Although representatives of the Ministry of Defence said they have plans for a solutions that includes freedom of choice, there is still no unambiguous conclusion found in documents pertaining the legislative draft. For example, the legislative draft mentions that it is possible to replace ‘active military service with civil service’. However, the conditions for this are planned to be listed in a separate law.
According to this solution, the ‘voluntary choice’ may turn out to be very conditional. Additionally, in order to properly go through the concept of VAD in the legislative process, the form and function of civil service needs to be clearly defined already, said Jansons.
Secondly, neither the legislative draft nor the annotation mention that the national defence training programme for university students will be available only to a small number of students.
According to information from the Ministry of Defence, currently the programme is planned for only 300 participants. Additionally, aside from the education process students will have a duty to undergo service in the National Guard, the ombudsman stresses.
Thirdly, the legislative draft also allows for the option of multiple alternatives to military service. However, the legislative draft also mentions that «National Defence Service primarily revolves around composition of appropriate personnel for execution of objectives set before the National Armed Forces».
The ombudsman also points out that the legislator must be honest and open before society, and formulate clearly and unambiguously if residents have the right to choose in which form they wish to complete their military service and whether this choice will depend on National Armed Forces’ ability to supply units with necessary equipment and secure sufficient personnel.
The ombudsman believes all the aforementioned issues have to be very carefully discussed in the legislative process and be clearly reflected in legislation and be clearly explained in communications with members of society.
Article 28 of the legislative draft states that the state is to finance studies in universities and colleges for those who have completed the National Defence Service, as long as those students meet enrollment requirements at those universities.
«The ombudsman stresses that the legislative draft has many problems and many topics that need careful discussions and explanations to members of society.»
«The letter mentions only the most serious and apparent problems with the draft,» as mentioned in the ombudsman’s letter to the Saeima.
The legislative draft previously received criticisms from the head of Saeima’s Legal Affairs Office Dina Meistere.