A/HRC/35/4 Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms. The Court considered that a final decision by the Minister of Defence, on the basis of a draft ministerial decision following a board’s proposal, did not afford the requisite safeguards of impartiality and independence, especially where the person concerned was interviewed by a board of which a majority of the members were senior army officers. 75 Furthermore, according to the Greek Ombudsman, there is a constant practice of unequal treatment of those objecting on ideological grounds in comparison to those objecting on religious grounds, which is also reflected in official statistics between 2007 and 2015, showing a recognition rate for conscientious objectors on religious grounds of above 96 per cent, while the recognition rate on ideological grounds is usually around or below 50 per cent. 76 E. Disproportional length of alternative service 54. A longer length of the civilian alternative service to military service for conscientious objectors in comparison to the length of military service infringes upon articles 18 and 26 of the Covenant if it is not based on reasonable and objective grounds. In several concluding observations adopted between 2013 and 2015, the Human Rights Committee encouraged several States to ensure that the length of service alternative to military service required for conscientious objectors was not punitive in nature. 77 With regard to the stipulation made by Kyrgyzstan of a shorter period of military and alternative service for persons with higher education, the Committee recommended that the State establish the length of military and alternative service on a non-discriminatory basis.78 55. Responding to the concerns of a member of the Human Rights Committee that periods of alternative civilian service that exceeded the standard length of military service could amount to a form of punishment against conscientious objectors, the delegation of Cyprus noted during its oral dialogue with the Committee in March 2015 that persons recognized as conscientious objectors could serve either 33 months of alternative social service or 24 months of alternative military service, explaining that the period of time served for alternative military service was shorter than that served for alternative social service owing to the more onerous tasks performed and the fact that the individual was away from home during his or her service.79 In the report on his mission to Cyprus, the Special Rapporteur on freedom of religion or belief had also raised the issue that alternative military service was, at that time, between seven and nine months longer than the period of time for military service. 80 In July 2016, a new law was passed that reduced the period of military service from 24 months to 14 months and that of alternative social service to a maximum of 19 months.81 F. Conscientious objection in disputed territories not under the Government’s control 56. In paragraph 7 of its Guidelines on International Protection No. 10, UNHCR notes that only States can require military conscription, whereas international law does not entitle non-State armed groups, whether or not they may be the de facto authority over a particular part of the territory, to recruit on a compulsory or forced basis. Yet, persons who live in such a disputed territory that is not under the Government’s control often face human rights 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 14 Papavasilakis v. Greece. See contributions from the Greek National Commission for Human Rights and from the Association of Greek Conscientious Objectors. See CCPR/C/AUT/CO/5, paras. 33-34; CCPR/C/BOL/CO/3, para. 21; CCPR/C/FIN/CO/6, para. 14; CCPR/C/GRC/CO/2, para. 38; CCPR/C/UKR/CO/7, para. 19. See CCPR/C/KGZ/CO/2, para. 23. See CCPR/C/SR.3143, paras. 21 and 29. See A/HRC/22/51/Add.1, para. 67. Contribution from the European Bureau for Conscientious Objection.