The article provides a criminal-law assessment of refusal, on religious grounds, to undergo mobilization and perform military service under wartime conditions. Since 2022, the position of law-enforcement and judicial practice has changed: courts have begun to issue convictions against individuals who refuse military service for religious reasons. However, academic literature still frequently maintains that such persons should be allowed to perform alternative service even during martial law and should not be held criminally liable under Articles 336, 337, 402–403, 407– 409, and 429 of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. The number of such acts amounts to thousands; alongside persons who attempt to evade military service under the pretext of exercising freedom of conscience, there are also numerous cases of genuine moral tragedies experienced by believers. Therefore, an adequate criminal-law assessment of these situations is of significant importance not only from a purely legal perspective, but also from a socio-political and moral-ethical one. The purpose of the article is to substantiate the hypothesis that, under the current legislation of Ukraine, persons who refuse mobilization by invoking their religious beliefs are subject to criminal liability. Arguments in support of this position are presented, including the assertion that such acts cannot be regarded as insignificant or as committed under circumstances excluding criminal unlawfulness, and that the case law of the European Court of Human Rights in such matters is not relevant. If alternative service is introduced during wartime, its conditions (in terms of duration, places of service, risks, etc.) must be ensured as comparable to those of military service, and liability for evasion or improper performance of alternative service must be established as no less severe than the liability borne by military personnel.

Journal articles

1. Rabinovych S, ‘Zamina vykonannia viiskovoho obov’iazku alternatyvnoiu (neviiskovoiu) sluzhboiu yak pozytyvne zobov’iazannia derzhavy v umovakh voiennoho stanu: pro et contra’ [2025] 2 Ukrainskyi chasopys konstytutsiinoho prava 45–76 https://doi.org/10.30970/ jcl.2.2025.4 (in Ukrainian). Newspaper articles

2. Vovk D, ‘Ukraine: How should government deal with conscientious objectors in wartime?’ (24 April 2025) (accessed 15.02.2026).

3. Hryshanova N, ‘Verkhovnyi Sud: vidmova vid mobilizatsii cherez relihiini perekonannia ne ye pidstavoiu dlia zvilnennia vid vidpovidalnosti’ (30 zhovtnia 2025) (accessed 15.02.2026) (in Ukrainian). pravoua.com.ua 92 Вячеслав Навроцький

4. Kopytko V, Franchuk D, ‘Vira ne zvilniaie vid mobilizatsii, ale ye niuansy. Koly mozhna ne yty na front cherez relihiiu’ (28.02.2025) (accessed 15.02.2026) (in Ukrainian).

5. Lab’iak I, ‘Chy mozhna otrymaty vidstrochku za relihiinymy perekonanniamy: yuryst use poiasnyv’ (08.04.25) (accessed 15.02.2026) (in Ukrainian).

6. Polishchuk V, ‘Vidmova vid viiskovoi sluzhby z relihiinykh mirkuvan: svoboda sovisti chy ukhylennia?’ (25.09.24) (accessed 15.02.2026) (in Ukrainian).

7. Vasin M, ‘Alternatyvna (neviiskova) sluzhba: shliakh reform abo vyrokiv’ (01.09.2015) (accessed 15.02.2026) (in Ukrainian). Websites

8. CrimeTracer – shvydkyi ohliad statystychnykh danykh shchodo protydii okremym kryminalnym pravoporushenniam [Stattia 336] (accessed 15.02.2026) (in Ukrainian).

9. Zakhyst svobody dumky, sovisti ta relihii v umovakh voiennoho chasu: u Kyievi vidbuvsia kruhlyi stil, prysviachenyi alternatyvnii sluzhbi (7 lystopada 2025) (accessed 15.02.2026) (in Ukrainian).

10. Svidkiv Yehovy uv’iazniuiut za viru. Dani po krainakh i terytoriiakh (Ofitsiinyi sait Svidkiv Yehovy) (accessed 15.02.2026) (in Ukrainian).