War Resisters´ International -järjestön kansainvälinen neuvosto julkisti
tänään päättyneessä kokouksessaan Koreassa alla olevan kannanoton:
WRI Council Statement on Conscientious Objection in Finland
The War Resisters' International Council Meeting in Seoul, Korea 30 June -
2 July 2005 demands that the Finnish government change its current stand of
ignoring the demands of the United Nations Human Rights Committee (UNHRC).
No person should be imprisoned or otherwise punished based on his or her
convictions, and one of the most evident such cases is that of refusing to
learn how to kill other people. Finland has for too long evaded its
responsibility to grant its citizens full rights of conscientious
objection. Human rights are not an issue of internal political debate, but
inalienable rights of all members of the human family.
On June 30 Finland sentenced two total objectors to imprisonment for
refusing to serve in neither military nor non-military service. Henrik
Rosenberg, hiphop-artist Iso-H from the group Fintelligens, was sentenced
in Helsinki district court to 195 days and a glass astisan Tero Isokääntä
in Loviisa district court to 197 days of imprisonment. Such sentences
should be revoked.
The court cases were the first after the Finnish government made its
decision in June not to comply with the demands of the UNHRC to amend its
legislation to meet the criteria of UN convention on civil and political
rights. The UNHRC stated in 2004 its "concern at the fact that the
preferential treatment accorded to Jehovah's Witnesses has not been
extended to other groups of conscientious objectors" as well as that
Finland "should fully acknowledge the right to conscientious objection and,
accordingly, guarantee it both in wartime and in peacetime; it should also
end the discrimination inherent in the duration of alternative civilian
service". Although there are other countries that do not fulfill their duty
in carrying out human rights, that is no grounds for states like Finland to
degrade their former systems of human rights and justice. Nor it is to
believe that such states could evade their fundamental responsibilities in
the fading light of their former achievements within the international
community.
The problems stated by UNHRC are not, however, the only problems of
conscientious objection in Finland. Not even the current non-military act
is implemented properly when it comes to the accomodation costs of men
performing non-military service. This, as well as the disproportionate
period of service, results in all conscientious objectors to be financially
in an inferior position to those performing military service.