Jehovah’s Witnesses Minister’s Draft Dispute Rejected by Court, Legal Delivery to TCC Found Violative

The eighth appeal court rejected the request of a Jehovah’s Witnesses minister to cancel his draft during the mobilization, citing his religious beliefs as a reason for exemption from military service. The man, who claimed his faith would prevent him from taking up arms, sought alternative nonmilitary service. On April 22, 2025, he was taken by police to the TCC (Territorial Command Center) as a person sought for violations of military accounting. The same day, he was assigned to a ministerial commission, issued a summons, and ordered to appear.

The following day, he was enrolled as a student in the school and informed in writing that due to his religious beliefs, he would not take up arms or participate in activities related to the ECC (Emergency Civil Committee) or the Ministry of Defense. He also requested alternative nonmilitary service and a vacation, with the assistance of the Religious Center of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

The court did not accept these arguments, noting that the alternative service law does not apply to mobilization during a specific period. It emphasized that there is no legal basis for mobilization based on religious beliefs, consistent with the Supreme Court’s previous stance that during a war state, all citizens have an obligation to provide state protection regardless of religion.

The court also pointed out that while clergy may be booked, this requires proper documentation and evidence that the plaintiff was included in the law enforcement list, which was not provided. At the same time, the court acknowledged a violation of law enforcement procedures during his delivery to the TCC, referencing an order from the Central Commander of the SS of December 16, 2024, which prohibits forcibly delivering ministers of registered religious organizations to the TCCC.

Despite this violation, the court determined it did not justify overturning the earlier orders to dismiss the man’s draft and include him in a military unit. This decision effectively separated the legality of his delivery to the TCC from the legality of his mobilization. The court’s ruling highlights the complexity of balancing religious freedoms with national security obligations during wartime.

The court’s decision reflects a broader legal trend where the Supreme Court has previously recognized Jehovah’s Witnesses’ right to refuse military service through alternative means, but recent rulings on mobilization during wartime have clarified that such exemptions are not available during specific periods of national emergency. This underscores the evolving legal landscape surrounding religious exemptions and state obligations in times of conflict.

Source: Read the original report (translated from Ukrainian)