- Details
- Written by: RobertEnsor
- Category: Conscription and gender equality
- Hits: 1900
Dear Sir, Madam or person of any other gender,
The International Covenant on Civil Rights and Political Rights (ICCPR, https://bit.ly/3XTwNI4) is a human rights treaty to which all EU countries, as well as Russia and Ukraine, are signatories. Compliance with it is an obligation under international law. Article 26 of the ICCPR prohibits signatories from discriminating against people on the basis of sex. Article 12.2 extends to all persons the right to leave any country, including their own. Article 4.1 allows signatories to derogate from Article 12.2 and other provisions of the treaty in the event that circumstances arise that threaten the very existence of the respective nation. However, Article 4.1 may only be invoked provided such a derogation does not involve discrimination based on, for instance, sex. Ukraine and Russia have breached the ICCPR in the following respects:
- the practice of male-only conscription is a breach of Article 26 and Article 4.1, even in the event of a national emergency and war; and
- not allowing men to leave Russia and Ukraine is a breach of Article 12.2 and, in so far as Russia and Ukraine have derogated from Article 12.2, such restrictions are a breach of Article 4.1, because the measure is applied in a manner that discriminates against men.
The EU Human Rights Agency has failed to make any comment on these violations of human rights or to call to account members of the European Commission or other officials who have failed to make mention of these human rights abuses. The Agency has failed to demand of EU officials that they uphold and defend the rights of men who are subjected to these abuses. Furthermore, the EU Temporary Protection Directive for Ukraine, of which mainly women and people younger than 18 and older than 59 are able to make use, is in practice predicated on the above human rights abuses by Ukraine. The EU Human Rights Agency has failed to draw attention to the fact that the EU Temporary Protection Directive is in practice discriminatory, if for no other reason than because it is not designed to ensure that both men and women have equal access to it. The Agency has not called on the EU and Ukraine to respect the right of men to leave Ukraine, nor has the Agency demanded that the derogation from Article 12.2 be applied without discrimination based on sex, as Article 4.1 requires. The Agency has, in fact, allowed this discriminatory practice to persist without comment and without any demand for measures to ensure the protection of men's human rights under the ICCPR and the ECHR.
In addition to the situation in Ukraine and Russia, the EU Human Rights Agency has failed to challenge the practice of male-only conscription and conscription in general within the EU. Article 15.1 ECHR allows any signatory to derogate from the provisions of the ECHR "...provided that such measures are not inconsistent with its other obligations under international law." Discriminatory male-only conscription is a violation of the EHCR and the EU Charter in peacetime and, since it is a treaty obligation under the ICCPR and hence under international law, it is also a breach of the EHCR and the EU Charter in wartime. The EU Fundamental Rights Agency has not challenged the practice of male-only conscription in, for instance, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Cyprus, Austria, Denmark and Greece.
Male-only conscription is not only discriminatory, but is also a form of institutionalised gender-based violence against men, perpetrated by the above EU Member States. It subjects men to the violence of war, as involuntary perpetrators and victims, solely on the basis of their sex/gender, resulting in death, injury, disability and psychological trauma. On this issue, the EU Human Rights Agency has failed to adopt a position, assess the human rights situation in this regard in EU Member States and call Member States to account.
It should also be borne in mind that male-only conscription in one EU Member State or member of NATO has discriminatory effects on citizens of other states in time of war. Suppose, for instance, that Finland were to be attacked by Russia and male and female conscripts from the Netherlands and Sweden were required to come to Finland's defence. These conscripts (male and female) would be required to defend Finland, while Finnish women would be free to seek refuge elsewhere in the EU. This would amount to discrimination based on sex between Dutch and Swedish male conscripts and Finnish women, and discrimination based on nationality between Finnish women and Dutch and Swedish women conscripts.
I would appreciate it if you would reply to this email as soon as possible and take the necessary steps to address the issues referred to in it.
Kind regards,
Robert Ensor
The Netherlands