upvote

points

by analog3115 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby lrasinen14 hours ago|
next
[-]
If there were one. The closest thing is the Treaty of Lisbon, which in turn was an update on the Treaties of Maastricht and Rome.

However, the matter has been heard in the European Court of Justice in 2002, and the short version is "Community law does not preclude compulsory military service being reserved to men."

For more details, feel free to study the legal opinion behind the ruling: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...

reply
upvoteby fabian2k14 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
It probably could be challenged under the German constitution, but nobody knows if that would be successful. The draft for men is set up in the constitution, but there is also an explicit equality for men and women in there. In the past any challenge would almost certainly have been denied, but it's a different time now.

In practice, this draft is not a real draft yet. Nobody is actually drafted, so there are almost no practical consequences. If there was an actual draft, I'd expect to see a challenge to this.

reply
upvoteby PeterStuer14 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Not sure about constitution, but it is clearly discrimination based on sex, which violates plenty of EU laws and regulations.
reply
upvoteby AdrianB114 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Some countries in the EU, like mine, have funny discrimination laws that say a positive discrimination is not considered a discrimination under the law, so it cannot be challenged. It is used as the basis for all women-favoring regulations.
reply
upvoteby 134159 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Such laws are unconstitutional in Germany. I'd be interested in which country you live in and an example of such a law.
reply
upvoteby rvnx15 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
I wouldn't trust the European Union to be the one that will challenge that German mobilization register at all.

COVID-19 has proven that if anything, the European Union tends to spread national initiatives among other countries (and Germany is often a leader in EU).

In this specific case, the EU is more likely to be the type of organization that would think about how to create a unified permit

-> as they did with the EU Digital COVID certificate; some sort of "I am in the register of mobilization" / "have a temporary travel authorization".

So, EU might be an enemy that pretends to be your friend there.

reply
upvoteby lrasinen14 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Humbug. Defence policy, especially how the EU member states choose to organize their military forces, is very much in the hands of the individual countries. A majority of the member states don't even have conscription anymore.

Yes, there is the common security and defence policy, and the Article 42 of Lisbon and all that, but it all still relies on national systems.

reply
upvoteby mytailorisrich14 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
next
[-]
That's interesting because on the face of it this none of the EU's business... but also typical of the EU and EU governments to expand what is thr EU's business little by little.
reply
upvoteby QuantumNomad_14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
The whole existence of the EU has its background in the end of WWII.

> 18 April 1951 – European Coal and Steel Community

> Based on the Schuman plan, six countries sign a treaty to run their coal and steel industries under a common management. In this way, no single country can make the weapons of war to turn against others, as in the past. The six are Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg. The European Coal and Steel Community comes into being in 1952.

https://european-union.europa.eu/principles-countries-histor...

Why wouldn’t a unified permit to prove you registered for mobilization be relevant to what the EU is for?

reply
upvoteby mytailorisrich14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Absolutely not. What you quote is beside the point and irrelevant.

Defence and the military is a sovereign matter that has nothing to do with the EU... except we are seeing that this is changing without democratic national mandates.

reply
upvoteby QuantumNomad_14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
How can it be irrelevant when the quoted text is from a website about the EU, written by the EU itself?

This is the EU describing its own history and beginnings.

reply
upvoteby mytailorisrich14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
How does that make it relevant?

I can only repeat that defence is a sovereign matter in which the EU has no power, but there is a trend of changing this by making it happen as "fait accompli", especially since the war in Ukraine, which is used as pretext.

reply
upvoteby tokai14 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Don't post made up lies here.
reply
upvoteby rvnx14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
https://defence-industry-space.ec.europa.eu/eu-defence-indus...

There is a new military Schengen project to make troops and unified military documentation across whole EU.

Obviously there will need to be a registry of personnel there, so these people can be prevented to leave.

On the side you have SIS Schengen, where you can (already) have an active arrest warrant for desertion.

Nothing indicates that European Union is going to fight against such registries. It's even the opposite.

reply
upvoteby fabian2k14 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Nothing in there is anywhere close to the claim you made.
reply
upvoteby mppm14 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Theoretically yes, practically no. The ECJ can order the revision of national laws, but the country in question is responsible for implementation, and can send plaintiffs on a multi-decade merry chase. Several countries have also taken the view that they can refuse changes to their constitutions. This stands on shaky ground legally, but there is no real enforcement mechanism anyway.
reply
upvoteby Krasnol14 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
I wonder why it is so trendy to want that.

Yeah, the law is unjust but spare even this part of the population this unnecessary risk. It's not like they can't join if they want to but why put force on it? So everybody feels miserable? What's the point?

And yeah, ich habe treu und tapfer verteidigt...

reply