Elena Tonkacheva: Belarus may be left without the law on non-military service

Draft law on alternative service was introduced into the House of Representatives of the Republic of Belarus in December 2013 and was withdrawn by the Council of Ministers shortly afterwards.

Two decades have passed since the beginning of discussion about the institution of alternative service, said Elena Tonkacheva, the head of the Legal Transformation Centre “Lawtrend” in the interview with the EuroBelarus Information Service.

- In December 2013 official webpages, which translate legal information, introduced draft law on alternative service. It was an important action for civil activists, human rights fighters and the organizations that have been waiting for the official draft law for a long time. Basically, we gained access to the final variant of the draft law; the one that the Council of Ministers introduced before Parliament. On the one hand, we were glad to get the possibility to work with the official version of draft law, as it has been developed confidentially. On the other hand, the introduction of the draft law has become a good opportunity to understand the intermediate stage and think over its contents.

But last Monday, on January 20, we were informed that the document is no longer under Parliament’s consideration, which was surprising for us to say the least.

- As it turned out, draft law was really introduced to the Parliament by the Council of Ministers, it was published and immediately withdrawn. The Members of Parliament didn’t have time to work with the draft law. According to the information that I managed to get from the Council of Ministers, the document was withdrawn due to technical reasons, Officials are going to remove these technical problems, so that the draft law returns back to the Parliament.

Elena Tonkacheva says that the situation is “somewhat unusual”.

- The work was already being done behind schedule. Of course, introduction and immediate withdrawal evokes questions. First of all, there was enough time for development, as the whole interdepartmental group was working on it for a long time. The draft law changes almost nothing; so the reasons for its withdrawal are unclear. I have a sad assumption that it might have happened in attempt to remove the law out of Parliament; though I will be glad if it is not so…

There are a number of reasons why this draft law would be criticised by experts and human rights fighters. First of all, it makes alternative service available only for religious reasons, and such model has long ago become outdated. Secondly, the term of alternative service in the draft law is much longer than the military service, irrespective of whether the person is a university graduate or not. It makes the draft law look like punishment rather than an attractive alternative; but even so it was withdrawn from parliament. Unfortunately, I couldn’t get substantial arguments regarding the reasons of its withdrawal.

Elena Tonkacheva emphasizes that the law would eliminate a twenty-year difference between the provisions of the Constitution and the requirements of the subordinate regulatory acts.

- On the other hand, public discussion regarding the contents of the law would be possible. For now we cannot discuss it, as the representatives at the Council of Ministers can always say that this draft law is not under consideration now. This situation reminds some kind of vacuum – on the one hand, we have a draft law; but on the other, in is unclear to whom we can talk about its contents. Most likely, it illustrates that we have a problem with involving citizens into rule-making process. And that requires special attention and further changes in the situation.