According to Article 1 of the Public Service Law, “All male citizens of the Islamic Republic of Iran are obligated to perform public service duties in accordance with the regulations of this law.” Deliberate absence from military service is considered a crime in Iranian laws. In addition to this criminalization, individuals who are absent from service are deprived of many services and job opportunities. These individuals may even be denied the right to obtain a driver’s license or passport. In other words, in addition to forcing mandatory military service on men, Iran’s laws have made it very difficult to avoid or escape from service.

There are many discussions about the effects of mandatory military service. According to some studies, military service has an impact on poverty, as 418,000 absent soldiers are among the lower class of society and only 200,000 absent soldiers belong to the higher class. It has been said that one of the reasons for boys’ desire to continue their education is delaying their enlistment in the military.

Opponents and supporters of mandatory military service each have their own reasons. A summary of their arguments is listed in the table below:

A scientific study conducted at the Parliament Research Center on military service in 197 countries around the world states: In 112 countries (57% of the countries studied), there is no mandatory military service. 28 countries have mandatory military service for one year or less, 20 countries have mandatory military service for 18 months or more, and non-voluntary service involves deployment in military operations. Additionally, 14 countries have selective military service, 15 countries have a combination of voluntary and mandatory service, and finally, 8 countries use non-armed military personnel for civilian or non-military purposes.

Multiple campaigns have declared their existence in protest against the conscription situation in Iran. The “No to Forced Conscription” campaign, launched by the Center for Liberal Studies and the group “Iranian Liberal Students and Graduates,” emphasizes the free choice of Iranian youth and strengthening the country’s military force. Campaign activists ask: “In a situation where in many countries, by resorting to professional conscription, on one hand, respect is shown for the right to choose and individual freedom of citizens, and on the other hand, the grounds for creating a strong army are provided and the waste of time and psychological damage to youth is avoided, what positive results has the continuation of mandatory conscription in Iran had for almost a decade?”

“Efforts have been made in the country to change the current model of military service. The Parliament’s research center has also made several proposals for changing the method of military service, but military officials insist stubbornly on continuing the current model. This insistence may have political and security reasons. Nevertheless, the armed forces in Iran are traditionally managed and it is believed that having a smaller number of personnel has made them more powerful. In comparison to advanced countries and even developing countries, the armed forces in Iran are not equipped with modern equipment. Therefore, they believe that if the model of military service changes, it will greatly diminish their military power. In other words, the failure to modernize the army and the inability of military officials to use modern military equipment will require a large number of young people to pay the price.”

What can be discussed from the perspective of human rights here is that although in no document has compulsory military service been explicitly recognized as a violation of human rights, in many documents, the prohibition of slavery and forced labor has been recognized. Some believe that compulsory military service is a form of forced labor and ultimately exploitation and slavery, and therefore goes against human rights standards.

On the other hand, some jurists believe that it is not permissible to force someone to serve in the military if they have objections based on religion, morality, or politics, under the guise of freedom of thought and religion. This issue is particularly important in countries where the government is not in line with the people and a large number of citizens believe that the military forces are primarily seeking to maintain the power of a particular group. Therefore, the topic of conscientious objection to compulsory military service has been raised in the field of human rights, and even the European Court of Human Rights has issued opinions on this matter. Generally, conscientious objection to military service refers to the deliberate refusal of an individual to serve in the military for religious, political, or moral reasons.

Another important issue that can be addressed from a human rights perspective is the guarantee of not being forced into compulsory military service. In Iran, refusing to serve in the military can have serious consequences, such as being unable to work in many professions, including all government jobs, not being issued a passport, not receiving a salary if still in service, and even having to pay off loans with a discharge card. In other words, many administrative and legal rights that are granted to citizens are taken away from someone who has not served in the military. This is why life is very difficult for a man who has not completed his military service. Having such guarantees cannot be proportional to not serving in the military. When someone commits a crime, their rights are only limited in certain circumstances, and even then, only for a temporary period, based on the discretion of the court. So the question is, why should someone be deprived of significant rights just because they did not serve in the military?

Note:

1- The source of the table used in this article is…

Article.

The ethical analysis of military service from the perspective of duty-based and consequentialist theories, written by Sajjad Hosseini and others.