That would be far more controversial, and including it here would likely result in opposition. I would rather not risk no protections whatsoever being created. It is therefore preferable to have this address only conscription into combative roles, and leave it up to future resolutions to address conscription into non-combative roles.
I would also strongly discourage opposing this because it does not address non-combative military service. Such a position will not result in non-combative military service being addressed; but rather, no forms of conscientious objection being addressed. The scope of this proposal is, therefore, limited to combative military service.
Believing that individuals have the right not to be forced to participate in combative roles in an armed conflict despite holding conscientious, moral, or religious objections against such participation,
Further noting that conscripted conscientious objectors not only are likely to be demoralised themselves, but also demoralise the rest of the armed force in which they are conscripts, thus providing little to no advantage as soldiers,
The World Assembly enacts as follows.
- No member nation may coerce, require, or otherwise compel any individual to serve in any role in an armed conflict wherein said individual would be required to attempt to directly cause physical harm or injury to any other individual, should that individual have expressed a bona fide conscientious, moral, or religious objection against serving in that role.
- Such an objection may only be voided by the individual in question. Further, no person may be penalised for expressing, holding, or failing to void, such an objection.
- This resolution does not prohibit member nations from enforcing forced military service in compliance with Sections 1 and 2. Yet, regardless of the other provisions of this resolution, the World Assembly shall maintain the power to further restrict forced military service by resolution.
Associated repeal.