A/HRC/35/4 I. Introduction 1. The Human Rights Council, in its resolution 20/2, requested the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) to prepare, in consultation with all States, relevant United Nations agencies, programmes and funds, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations and national human rights institutions, a quadrennial analytical report on conscientious objection to military service, in particular on new developments, best practices and remaining challenges. 2. By notes verbales and letters dated 11 January 2017, OHCHR invited the various stakeholders to provide any relevant information pursuant to the request made in resolution 20/2. Contributions were received from 19 Member States, from all regions, six national human rights institutions and 18 non-governmental organizations. All the contributions will be available for public consultation on a web page on the OHCHR site; 1 the previous reports of the High Commissioner on conscientious objection to military service, including the previous analytical report of June 2013, will also be directly accessible from the site. 3. The present report outlines the international legal framework, with particular attention paid to developments since 2013 (sect. II), as well as State law and practice, both in terms of best practices (sect. III) and remaining challenges (sect. IV). Lastly, the report contains conclusions and recommendations concerning laws, policies and practices relating to conscientious objection to military service (sect. V). II. International legal framework, in particular new developments A. Right to conscientious objection to military service 4. The right to conscientious objection to military service is based on article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, which guarantees the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion or belief. This right includes freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of one’s choice, and freedom, either individually or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest one’s religion or belief in worship, observance, practice and teaching. While the Covenant does not explicitly refer to a right to conscientious objection, in 1993 the Human Rights Committee stated that such a right could be derived from article 18, inasmuch as the obligation to use lethal force might seriously conflict with the freedom of conscience and the right to manifest one’s religion or belief.2 5. In its jurisprudence adopted subsequent to the issuance of general comment No. 22 (1993), the Human Rights Committee found a right to conscientious objection in a series of Views on individual communications.3 In Jong-nam Kim et al. v. Republic of Korea, the Committee reiterated that the right to conscientious objection to military service was inherent to the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, entitling any individual to exemption from compulsory military service if the latter could not be reconciled with the individual’s religion or beliefs. 4 Since this right must not be impaired by coercion, the majority of the Committee members held that repression of the refusal to be drafted for compulsory military service, exercised against persons whose conscience or religion prohibited the use of arms, was incompatible with the absolutely protected right to hold a 1 2 3 4 2 See www.ohchr.org/EN/Issues/Pages/ListofIssues.aspx. See general comment No. 22 (1993) on the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, para. 11. For an overview of individual communications relating to conscientious objection issued up to 2012, see A/HRC/23/22, paras. 8-13 and Conscientious Objection to Military Service (United Nations publication, Sales No. E.12.XIV.3). See communication No. 1786/2008, Views adopted on 25 October 2012, para. 7.4.