[2006] UKAIT 00016
should no longer be followed? (iii) Are draft evaders who have been imprisoned under Article 336 of the Ukrainian criminal code required thereafter to undertake military service during periods of mobilisation ? If so what are the conditions to which they will be exposed during such military service? 7. At the hearing however it was agreed by both parties and the Panel that it is only possible to address the first two issues with a view to providing country guidance and that there was simply insufficient country of origin material available to make any informed guidance decision on the third issues as to whether those conscripted or mobilised into the Ukrainian army were at real risk of being required to commit acts contrary to international humanitarian law or whether they would be at real risk of persons such as the appellants being subject to " dedovshchina ", which means violent bullying or initiation within the army, which might in turn put those recruited or mobilised at risk of serious harm. 16. In her Grounds Ms Norman submitted that the judge erred in law in regarding VB as being authoritative on the IHL point, and in failing to assess the further evidence provided relating to breaches of IHL. At the ‘error of law’ hearing, an d in written submissions received from the parties following the ‘error of law’ hearing, Ms Norman developed her second ground. She contends that the relevant law provides as follows: A person is a refugee if he faces non-optional recruitment, or penalty for refusal, to a military which is committing acts, with which he may be associated, contrary to international humanitarian law. 17. In her submission t he mere fact that there is ‘non-optional recruitment’ or a ‘ penalty ’ for re f using conscription , regardless of the nature or seriousness of the penalty , would entitled a person to refugee status if he would, as a result of conscription, face a real risk of being associated with acts contr ary to basic rules of human conduct . In support of her submission Ms Norman relies on
- DECISION AND REASONS
- ackground
- VB and Another (draft evaders and prison conditions) Ukraine
- OM (AA(1) wrong in law) Zimbabwe
- challenge to the First-tier Tribunal’s decision
- [2006] UKAIT 00016
- Krotov
- BE (Iran)
- The pre-trial detention issue
- The IHL issue
- Sepet v SSHD
- Krotov v SSHD
- (e) prosecution or punishment for refusal to perform military service in a conflict, where performing military service would include crimes or acts falling under the exclusion clauses as set out in Article 12(2)
- prosecution or punishment for refusal to perform military service in a conflict, where performing military service would include crimes or acts falling under regulation 7
- Sepet and Bulbul
- MI & Anor v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Amare v Secretary of State for the Home Department
- Andre Shepherd v Bundesrupublik Deutschland
- Direction Regarding Anonymity – Rule 14 of the Tribunal Procedure (Upper Tribunal) Rules 2008
