European Parliament Hearing on Conscientious Objection
January 28, 2009
The Sub/committee for Security and Defence of the European Parliament organized a Parliamentarian Hearing on 22 January. Speakers were Johan Galtung, Professor of Peace Studies, Transcend, Oslo, Norway, Peter ROWE, Professor of Law, University of Lancaster, UK and Andreas Speck, War Resisters International, London, UK
Johan Galtung: Nuremberg judgment stated that obedience cannot justify illegal actions. This point needs to be included into the Geneva Convention. There is more a duty for conscientious objection than only a right. He mentioned the withdrawal of Switzerland from ISAF in Afghanistan. They had been invited for a peace keeping mission which turned into a war against the rebels. The UN Charter is making a difference between accepted and non-accepted wars from the point of view of international law. Does a state have the right to kill?
Andreas Speck, WRI mentioned German, Holland and United Kingdom to be the only EU member states that accept conscientious objection for professional solders. Poland does not accept conscientious objection in time of war. A limited number of EU member states accepts conscientious objection during war time. Selective conscientious objection for specific wars is generally not foreseen. Professional soldiers have to refund expenses to the army in case of conscientious objection (Germany) or have not sufficient information (Holland, United Kingdom).
Prof. Peter Rowe, jurist, UK discussed illegal orders and the rights of soldiers to disobey, dealing with situations where a person has become a member of the armed forces. Refusal to obey is often caused by CO. Distinction between the two: subjective belief or objective assessment of the law ex post facto. Importance of obeying orders in a military structure – see also EU Status of Forces Agreement from 2003 on jurisdiction of sending State. Generally the national law will apply for the sent contingent; there is no international body responsible. Further elements: What is an order? - Express, to act or not to act, spoken or written. Unclear orders. No order but act as think commander wishes. Order from civilians and their validity? What is an illegal order? Contrary to national law (acts of omissions). Conformity with national law but contrary to international law. Rules of engagement (RoE). Complex mixture of national law (sending and receiving States). His conclusion: Soldiers are better protected where exist a discipline and culture of obeying the law. Illiteracy of soldiers can create problems to understand orders. Responsibility of soldiers because of superior orders is not a defence. Importance of command responsibility. Importance of carefully prepared RoE
General discussion:
MEP Konrad (D) PPE: how far conscientious objection can go?
MEP Gomez (PT) PSE : where ends the responsibility of someone who gives orders? Which UN convention can apply?
MEP Tobias Pflüger (D) GUE spoke in favour of a new resolution of he European Parliament as the last ones are out of date. Should there a unified European ruling? Should we not regularise conscientious objection within the rules of engagement for EU missions? Attention on CO regulations in candidate countries like Turkey should be given.
Galtung: In the sense of the UN Charter the Iraq war is illegal. (said Kofi Annan).
Speck: The right of Conscientious objection must be part of the adhesion negotiations with Turkey.
Rowe: International legal orders are still not clear enough. A unified status for all EU armies might be difficult to realize as they have to be integrated in national law.
The Sub Committee will produce a White book with recommendations and documents
The Sub Committee received the EBCO Annual report on conscientious objection 2007.
Speeches and EP resolutions from 1989 and 1993 can be found at the website of the Sub Committee
