İHD Conscientious Objection Commission: ‘We need to rethink security, the budget and militarism together’

On August 11, the İHD Conscientious Objection Commission convened a meeting at Atölye BİA in Istanbul, marking a renewed effort to address systemic challenges faced by individuals who refuse military service due to ethical or religious convictions. The gathering, organized by the IPS Communication Foundation/bianet as part of its ongoing "Meetings with Rights Organizations" initiative, brought together representatives from both the foundation and the İHD İstanbul Branch Conscientious Objection Commission. Attendees included Sinem Aydınlı, research coordinator at Atölye BİA; Vecih Cuzdan, managing editor of bianet; Evrim Gündüz, assistant at Atölye BİA; Jiyan Tosun, and Alper Yalçın, both representing the İHD commission. The session focused on the reactivation of the İHD Conscientious Objection Commission, which had been dormant since the early 2000s. Tosun explained that the commission was originally formed to advocate for conscientious objectors and to challenge the state's militaristic policies. It became active during a period marked by heightened activism around antimilitarism and opposition to war. However, over the years, the nature of rights violations against conscientious objectors has evolved. While earlier violations were often overt, such as arrests and legal penalties, the current challenges are more insidious. They manifest in restricted access to employment, education, and healthcare, effectively limiting the ability of these individuals to lead normal lives. Tosun emphasized that these ongoing violations are less visible than before, making it harder for conscientious objectors to seek support or recognition. As a result, the commission decided to reactivate in June 2025, aiming to raise awareness and push for policy changes that protect the rights of such individuals. Alper Yalçın, another participant, highlighted the broader implications of conscientious objection. He noted that individuals who declare themselves conscientious objectors are frequently mislabeled as draft evaders or deserters, which can lead to discrimination in various aspects of life. For example, while some conscientious objectors might secure jobs with social security benefits, they could later face official inquiries or sanctions. Additionally, obtaining documents necessary for higher education, such as the military status certificate, becomes difficult. Yalçın also addressed the concept of "civil death," a term used to describe the loss of fundamental rights and freedoms experienced by conscientious objectors. He argued that this label risks reducing their struggles to mere victimhood. Instead, he stressed that conscientious objection represents a deeper commitment to antimilitarism and anti-war principles. This perspective underscores the importance of examining not just the individual experiences of objectors, but also the broader systems that enable and sustain militarization. In his remarks, Yalçın called for a comprehensive approach to addressing the issue of conscientious objection. He suggested that discussions on peace must include reevaluating the structures of military spending and defense industry policies. He pointed out that the operations and influence of defense companies play a critical role in shaping national security narratives and, consequently, public attitudes toward militarism. By opening these topics for scrutiny, there is potential to foster a more inclusive and peaceful societal framework.