ABUSE OF RIGHTS IN THE SPHERE OF ALTERNATIVE (NON-MILITARY) SERVICE

Abstract

The article provides a comprehensive analysis of the issue of abuse of law in the exercise of the right to alternative (non-military) service in Ukraine under martial law. The citizen’s right to alternative service, guaranteed by Article 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine and several international instruments (Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights, and Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights), is examined as a specific form of freedom of conscience. However, its practical implementation faces significant challenges, particularly due to the lack of clearly defined legal mechanisms during mobilization.It is substantiated that one of the key challenges is the phenomenon of abuse of rights, which can be twofold: by citizens, through false declarations of beliefs to evade conscription; and by officials, through unjustified restrictions on access to this right. The article emphasizes the importance of applying the general legal principle of good faith as a criterion for distinguishing legitimate exercise of the right from its abuse.Recent case law is analyzed, including verdicts recognizing both bad-faith draft evasion and the protection of genuine conscientious objection based on deep and consistent religious beliefs.Special attention is given to actions of officials from Territorial Centers for Recruitment and Social Support (TCRSS), who sometimes obstruct the realization of the right, by refusing to accept applications, failing to explain procedures, withholding copies of submissions, or applying psychological pressure. These actions may constitute abuse of authority and qualify as administrative or criminal offenses. Appeals to courts, the Ukrainian Parliament Commissioner for Human Rights, and law enforcement reflect institutional resistance to this right.It concludes that the legal framework for the exercise of the right to alternative service must be supported by institutional guarantees to prevent its erosion through abuse, by both individuals and state authorities.