
Ukrainian schoolchildren who have gone abroad must return by the age of 17 and obtain a military conscription certificate – representative of the Poltava Territorial Recruitment Center says
February 6, 2024
A man has been abducted by military officials and has been held for 12 days
February 6, 2024The scandalous draft law on mobilization does not correspond to the principles of a legal democratic state.
This was stated by the Main Scientific and Expert Department of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.
The conclusions of the Main Scientific and Expert Department of the Verkhovna Rada on the government bill on mobilization are as follows:
- The innovation regarding “influence measures” (such as restricting the right to drive vehicles, freezing accounts and assets) is termed by the Main Scientific and Expert Department as “state coercion of individuals.” Lawyers of the Verkhovna Rada argue that this innovation cannot be accepted because it seeks to hold individuals evading mobilization accountable outside the existing legal mechanisms. These “influence measures” do not fall under civil, administrative, or criminal liability. Even the implementation of such measures by court order raises objections, as the state already has mechanisms to hold lawbreakers accountable. The application of these influence measures has no alternatives. It is not considered that such a requirement from the Territorial Recruitment Center may be unlawful (for example, if a person has a deferment or is on a special register). The Main Scientific and Expert Department concludes that “the proposed norms, in fact, do not provide any protection for citizens against the arbitrariness of the authorities, which does not correspond to a legal democratic state, even in a state of war.”
The prohibition on driving vehicles in current legislation is a measure to ensure criminal proceedings. Such measures are not applied in administrative proceedings. “Moreover, such a restriction cannot be applied to all citizens without exception who have not complied with the requirements of the mobilization law (in the draft version) regardless of circumstances,” the Main Scientific and Expert Department believes. It also criticizes that driving a vehicle may be a primary source of income for a citizen, and this provision will deprive them of means of subsistence.
The freezing of citizens’ funds and assets is used as a consequence of a debtor’s failure to fulfill property obligations, not as an influence measure to enforce the demands of state authorities. The arrest of funds placed in the National Bank of Ukraine and foreign banks is not permissible, notes the Main Scientific and Expert Department. And it concludes that this provision may deprive Ukrainian citizens of social protection rights.
Additionally, the Main Scientific and Expert Department noted that the draft includes a provision stating that the “influence measure” can be challenged within 15 days, which still means that the court’s decision takes effect immediately. Furthermore, as previously noted by journalists, the judicial decision seems to be a mere formality, as “the court, without examining all the circumstances, is obliged to legalize the position stated in the application of the Territorial Recruitment Center, regardless of its justification, which is unacceptable,” the Main Scientific and Expert Department notes.
- The requirement to register an electronic account for a conscript, military obligee, reservist is incomplete. It is unclear which system will provide such services.
- The time for appearing at the Territorial Recruitment Center is not clearly formulated. It is unclear from which date to count 60 days for appearing at the Territorial Recruitment Center.
- It is not stated how local authorities should ensure the arrival of conscripts at the Territorial Recruitment Center. The Main Scientific and Expert Department also notes that according to the law on personal data protection, the Constitution, and international norms, a person may not disclose their personal data at the request of the authorities.
- The issue remains as to how the presence of women on military registration will be verified since only some of them have military obligations.
- The bill ambiguously interprets the right of the Territorial Recruitment Center to establish obligations for a citizen, except to appear or clarify registration data.
- The Main Scientific and Expert Department criticizes the new provision that deferment will be granted only to first-degree relatives of a person requiring care, as in practice, other family members who are not necessarily first-degree relatives may be supporting the conscript, and in the event of a conscription of the breadwinner of the person requiring care, they will be left without assistance.
- The Main Scientific and Expert Department criticizes the removal from the law of the provision that a conscript may exercise control over the parents of the wife (husband), grandparents, half-brothers, and half-sisters.
- There are no criteria for protecting law enforcement officers, which “will lead to unpredictability of changes and legal relations in this area.”
- Contract graduate students should retain the right to deferment, according to the Main Scientific and Expert Department, as the law provides equal rights for education for both budget-funded and contract students.
- There is no legal regulation on communication with conscripts residing abroad. It is unclear which authority abroad will accept the demands of the Territorial Recruitment Center.
- The Main Scientific and Expert Department criticizes the innovation that the police should bring conscripts to the Territorial Recruitment Center, as there is no evidence of a citizen committing an offense, and without a court decision on a person’s guilt, no one can be considered guilty of an offense.