Moldova

Previous reports: 2024 | 2023/24

List of corrections:

• 4 July 2026: Correction in the duration of military service for graduates from 6 to 3 months and addition in Principal concerns.

Principal EBCO concerns

• Alternative service is punitive and discriminatory in terms of significantly longer duration for certain categories (those with higher education).

• Conscientious objectors are subjected to enquiry and are discriminated against when applying on grounds other than membership to specific religious denominations.

• No recognition of right to conscientious objection during or after military service or for serving personnel.

Based on the reply of the Moldovan People's Advocate Office (Ombudsman) to EBCO’s questionnaire:

Developments

The Ministry of Defense is planning to amend the legislation regarding military service, defense of the homeland, etc., but it is not known whether the concerns around conscientious objection will be addressed. Although the Military Strategy has been approved, these observations are not found in its content, which means that, most probably, they will not be reflected in the legislation on military service either.

Conscientious objection provisions and procedures

In November 2023, the Ombudsman elaborated the Follow-up Visit Report to the “Moldova” Motorized Infantry Brigade from the municipality of Bălți, section I. The situation of conscientious objectors.²

Following the visit and the findings made, the Ombudsman noted the existence of serious deficiencies in the recruitment mechanism, manifested by the enlistment into the National Army of persons who have clearly expressed their conscientious objection, as well as of persons who invoke reasons related to religious, philosophical convictions, sexual orientation or other relevant personal circumstances. According to the Ombudsman “this practice contravenes both national legislation and the international commitments assumed by the Republic of Moldova and constitutes a violation of the fundamental rights guaranteed by Article 18 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.”

The Ombudsman’s position is that “the simple declaration of a person regarding the moral impossibility of bearing arms or performing military service is sufficient to activate the mechanism of referral to civil (alternative) service, without the need to prove it through certificates or other supporting documents. The recruitment commissions must not question or countermand the option of the recruit, but must start from the premise of respecting his or her right to conscientious objection.

At the same time, the Ombudsman finds that the lack of an effective mechanism for the protection of conscientious objectors not only generates violations of human rights, but also creates additional difficulties in the process of training and integration of conscripts, affecting the proper functioning of the military institution. A modern and professional army must be based on the freely expressed will of candidates and on the conscious assumption of military service, not on coercion.

Moreover, the Ombudsman draws attention to discriminatory and unprofessional approaches manifested towards persons of different sexual orientation, which indicate the persistence of stereotypes and of an institutional culture incompatible with human rights standards.

In this context, the Ombudsman reiterates the recommendation addressed to the Ministry of Defense to urgently review the mechanism of enlistment into the Armed Forces, so that it is centered on respecting conscientious objection and other well-founded personal circumstances, to prevent abusive recruitment and to ensure the effective application of the right to civil (alternative) service, in accordance with international standards and national legislation.”

The Ombudsman has also expressed positions on the topic of “conscientious objectors” in the Special Report on ill-treatment based on discrimination in a military unit: the Pavlescu case (ex officio notification no. 07-10/1 of 17/01/2022).³

At recruitment, young people are required to certify that they belong to a religion other than the majority one, under the “religion” criterion. In the absence of a “certificate”, they are declared fit for recruitment. There are some denominations that issue such certificates, and, depending on them, in the “eyes” of the members of the Recruitment Commission, young people are accepted or rejected. There are not many such cases, but the problem persists.

As regards “conscience”, for example the refusal to hold a weapon, the Commissions do not take this will seriously, including due to the lack of written proof. In addition, national legislation does not provide clear criteria for non-admission to military service of persons who invoke conscientious motives.

Conscientious objection during and after military service

Military legislation does not provide for the “release from military service” of persons who have taken the oath and who later realize that they “do not want to hold a weapon in their hands”, for pacifist, educational, conscientious or religious reasons.

1. Military expenditure figures are estimates published by SIPRI (The Stockholm International Peace Research Institute) in April 2026.↩︎
2. https://ombudsman.md/post-document/raport-in-baza-vizitei-de-follow-up-efectuate-la-brigada-de-infanterie-motorizata-moldova-din-municipiul-balti-la-data-de-20-noiembrie-2023/, p. 12.↩︎
3. https://ombudsman.md/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Raport_Special_cazul_pavlescu_FINAL-3.pdf↩︎