Editing Conscientious objector (section)

===Finland===
{{See also|Siviilipalvelus}}
Finland introduced conscription in 1881, but its enforcement was suspended in 1903 as part of [[Russification]]. During the [[Finnish Civil War]] in 1918, conscription was reintroduced for all able-bodied men. In 1922, the option of noncombatant military service was introduced, but service in the military remained compulsory on pain of imprisonment. After the struggle of pacifist [[Arndt Pekurinen]] a law was passed providing for a peacetime-only alternative to military service, or civilian service (Finnish {{Lang|fi|siviilipalvelus}}). The law was dubbed "Lex Pekurinen" after him. During the [[Winter War]], Pekurinen and other conscientious objectors were imprisoned, and Pekurinen was eventually executed at the front in 1941, during the [[Continuation War]].

After the war, a conscientious objector's civilian service lasted 16 months, whereas military service was 8 months at its shortest. To qualify for civilian service, an objector had to explain his conviction before a board of inspection that included military officers and clergymen. In 1987, the duration of the service was shortened to 13 months and the board of inspection was abolished. In 2008, the term was further shortened to 12 months to match the duration of the longest military service (that of officer trainees and technical crew). Today, a person subject to conscription may apply for civilian service at any time before or during his military service, and the application is accepted as a matter of course. A female performing voluntary military service can quit her service anytime during the first 45 days, however, if she wants to quit after those 45 days she would be treated like a male and assigned to civilian service.

Persons who have completed their civilian service during peacetime have, according to the legislation enacted in 2008, the right to serve in non-military duties also during a crisis situation. They may be called to serve in various duties with the rescue services or other necessary work of a non-military nature. Persons who declare themselves to be conscientious objectors only after a crisis has started must, however, prove their conviction before a special board. Before the new legislation, the right to conscientious objection was acknowledged only in peacetime. The changes to the service term and to the legal status of objectors during a crisis situation were made as a response to human rights concerns voiced by several international bodies,<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.aseistakieltaytyjaliitto.fi/ihmisoikeuselimet.html|title=Suomi syrjii aseistakieltäytyjiä! – AKL|website=aseistakieltaytyjaliitto.fi|access-date=12 August 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070726143012/http://www.aseistakieltaytyjaliitto.fi/ihmisoikeuselimet.html|archive-date=26 July 2007|url-status=dead}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/CCPR.CO.82.FIN.En?Opendocument|title=unhchr.ch|website=unhchr.ch|access-date=12 August 2017}}</ref> who are overseeing the implementation of human rights agreements. These organisations had demanded Finland to take measures to improve its legislation concerning conscientious objectors, which they considered discriminatory. None of these organisations have yet raised concerns on the current legislation.

There are a small number of total objectors who refuse even civilian service, and are imprisoned for six months. This is not registered into the person's criminal record.
<!---Text from [[Conscientious objection throughout the world]] - needs merging into existing text -
For many decades, the civilian service remained unpopular and difficult to choose. Refusing military service would have been very strongly discouraged by all state officials, and getting accepted as a conscientious objector required a trial by an examination board, whose judgement was often very harsh and strongly biased towards military service. These boards included army officers and clergy. A typical hypothetical presented to the examinee was "If a group of men threatened to beat your girlfriend up, would you try to stop them?".

The examinations were abolished in the 1980s, and today a conscientious objector is only required to check a box in the draft form and state whether his reasons are religious or ethical. Severe social stigma attachs to conscientious objection, and the military, which is responsible for the draft, does not advertise the option beyond their legal obligation to mention the option to draftees.

The civilian service of conscientious objectors lasts 395 days, over twice as long as the shortest and most common military service (180 days) and thirty days longer than the longest and mostly voluntary service (365 days).

The first four weeks of the civilian service are spent in training, which mostly consists of general-purpose lectures on various topics. The first three weeks of the training are held at the [[Lapinjärvi Educational Center]], and the fourth week is a free vacation.

In Finland today, the right to conscientious objection is still acknowledged only in peacetime. In recent years several international bodies<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.aseistakieltaytyjaliitto.fi/ihmisoikeuselimet.html|title=Suomi syrjii aseistakieltäytyjiä! – AKL|website=aseistakieltaytyjaliitto.fi|access-date=12 August 2017}}</ref> (for example UN's Human Rights Committee<ref name="unhchr.ch">{{cite web|url=http://www.unhchr.ch/tbs/doc.nsf/(Symbol)/CCPR.CO.82.FIN.En?Opendocument|title=unhchr.ch|website=unhchr.ch|access-date=12 August 2017}}</ref>), who are overseeing the implementation of human rights agreements, have demanded Finland to take measures to improve its legislation concerning COs, since they have found it to be discriminatory. Sources of criticism have been the punitive length of the civilian alternative to military service, the release of conscientious objectors from military duty only during peace time and the negligence in arranging accommodation for the servicemen{{Citation needed|date=March 2007}}. Since 1999, [[Amnesty International]]<ref name="amnesty.org">https://www.amnesty.org/en/documents/eur20/001/1999/en/ {{Bare URL inline|date=March 2022}}</ref> has considered Finnish ''total objectors'', who have refused to carry out non-military service, as prisoners of conscience, because of the punitive length of civilian service.

The main 12-month period of service can be performed in any institution that is both non-profit and beneficial to the society. Examples include state bureaus, schools, universities, hospitals, libraries, theatres and independent non-profit organisations such as [[Amnesty International]]. Institutions wishing to accept conscientious objectors must comply with rules laid down by the Finnish Ministry of Labour.

From the state's point of view, conscientious objectors are subject to the same rights and obligations as military enlisted men. How the service is handled in practice depends on the place of service, but a typical service consists of a common 40-hour week in the institution.

Some 2,500 men opt for the civilian service every year, which is ca. 10% of the men drafted.

Men who refuse both the military and the civilian services are known as total objectors (Finnish ''totaalikieltäytyjä''). Total objectors are sentenced unconditionally to a prison term equal to half their remaining service. In 2002, some 80 men were convicted as total objectors. It is usual for total objectors to cite in their defence the Finnish Constitution, several international human rights bodies (for example UN's Human Rights Committee<ref name="unhchr.ch"/>), and the [[European Convention on Human Rights]], which bans forced labour except in emergencies and wartime, as well as the arguably discriminatory and unconstitutional exemption from military service granted to women, men living in demilitarised Åland and [[Jehovah's Witnesses]].

Since 1999, [[Amnesty International]]<ref name="amnesty.org"/> have considered the excessive length, as compared to military service, of the civilian service to be punitive and accordingly classifies Finnish total objectors as [prisoners of conscience]. In one recent case (namely ''Case-Hermaja''<ref>http://www.hermaja.org/ {{Bare URL inline|date=March 2022}}</ref>), a total objector Jussi Hermaja has sought asylum from another country, Belgium. While asylum was eventually not granted, he was not extradited because the state of Finland never filed a formal request.

Since some 80% of Finnish men undergo military service and since military training and rank are considered merits at the job market, conscientious objectors experience discrimination. A reserve officer's or NCO's rank is considered a more significant merit for management positions than university degrees or work experience (see [[management by perkele]]). However, in most cases employers legally have no defensible reason to favour or even ask about a candidate's military training.--->