On semi-conscripts

The State Duma will establish a procedure according to which a judicial appeal against a decision on conscription will not suspend its execution

A number of State Duma deputies, led by General Andrei Kartapolov, introduced bill No. 1170412-8, which would significantly weaken the guarantees for conscripts suffering from diseases that prevent service, or insisting on alternative service.

Today, in the event of a conscript’s complaint to the court, “the decision of the draft commission is suspended until the court’s decision enters into legal force” (Part 4 of Article 29 of the Federal Law No. 53 of March 28, 1998 “On Military Duty and Military Service”). This gives conscripts at least a reprieve during which they can, among other things, collect evidence in their favor. The initiators of the bill propose to preserve the right of conscripts to complain to the court, but to change the wording of Art. 29 and establish that “the decision may be suspended by the court in the manner prescribed by the Code of Administrative Proceedings” (CAS RF).

Kartapolov and others refer to Article 223 of the CAS on preliminary protection measures in an administrative claim to invalidate decisions, actions of a body, organization, person vested with state or other public powers. This norm does not call the court to suspend the decision, but only gives it such a right if the administrative plaintiff requests it.

The CAS of the Russian Federation, adopted in 2015, contains a general rule that is not subject to application in case of conflict with a special rule (and it is established by the law on conscription and military service of 1998). To resolve the contradiction, deputies from the Defense Committee are wisely targeting the latest law.

The proposal has its own legal logic, but it will be defeated by the logic of law enforcement, which is not difficult to foresee.

Conscientious judges are unlikely to meet the conscripts halfway in the context of the continuation of the special military operation.

This means that by the time the case is considered on its merits, the conscripts will already be in active units, and their capabilities in terms of collecting evidence will be very limited. And some of them may not even live to see their claim considered.

Conscripts who fell under such mobilization, or their relatives in the future, having exhausted the possibilities in the courts of general jurisdiction, will apparently have the opportunity to appeal to the Constitutional Court. The basis for such a complaint may be Part 2 of Art. 55 of the Constitution: “In the Russian Federation, no laws should be issued that abolish or diminish the rights and freedoms of man and citizen.” However, this constitutional principle has long been forgotten.