9.35 The minutes of a presentation by Dr David Bozzini, given to the Swiss Federal Office for Migration on 16 February 2012, entitled ‘National Service and State Structures in
Eritrea’, noted that:
‘Since 2005, conscripts in the civil sector of the National Service have to name a responsible relative (sometimes called a "sponsor" or "guarantor" (wuhaz)) who will be addressed in case of desertion or any liability. This measure was introduced by the Ministry of Education to facilitate systematic retaliation towards the the [sic] relatives of deserters. Authorities expected that it would inhibit would-be deserters, since they know who will be punished for their deeds.
‘In case of desertion, retaliatory measures for the relatives include: Fines of 50,000 Nakfa, the withdrawal of business licenses and arrest. In some cases, for the renewal of business licenses, traders have to prove that their children have fulfilled their National Service duty in order to obtain its renewal.
‘Retaliatory measures are not applied systematically. Such measures are now less frequent but are still enforced. Repression of family members of deserters is used by the Eritrean regime set to achieve a certain amount of control in the diaspora, especially on new migrants who have fled indefinite conscription.’ [33a] (pages 10-11)
9.36 The Amnesty International report ‘Eritrea - 20 years of Independence, but still no freedom’, published on 9 May 2013, stated that:
‘Many people who fled the country while of national service age, deserting or evading conscription have told Amnesty International that their family was subjected to reprisals.
Families are subjected to a fine, widely reported to be 50,000 Nakfa (approximately US$
3,800). In some cases, families have reportedly paid this in instalments if they cannot afford to pay the full amount in one payment. According to testimonies received by Amnesty International, in some cases where families have not been able to pay, a family member has been arrested and detained…This is reportedly often a parent, but detention of other family members has also been reported. These detainees are not charged with any offence, brought before a judicial authority or provided with access to a lawyer. The duration of detention in these cases varies, according to reports. Amnesty International has received reports that detention of family members detained in place of escaped relatives can last up to a year, but in many cases detention is for periods ranging from several weeks to several months.’ [6c] (page 32)
9.37 The United States State Department ‘2012 Human Rights Report: Eritrea’, published on 19 April 2013, stated: ‘In contrast with previous years, there were no reports that
security forces continued to detain and arrest the parents and spouses of individuals who evaded national service or fled the country.’ [3b] (section 1d)
See Human rights violations by the security forces.
Return to contents Go to sources
Round-ups (‘Giffas’)
9.38 The HRW ‘Service for Life - State Repression and Indefinite Conscription in Eritrea’
report, published on 16 April 2009, noted that:
‘Conscription is generally managed by local councils, the smallest units of local
administration, sometimes referred to as kebelle, sometimes as memehidar, a general word meaning ‘administration’. These council officials maintain detailed records on the individual families in their area and ensure that those of age are conscripted. But in larger towns, the police or military also try to capture evaders or deserters through ad hoc round-ups. Round-ups of the population in towns and villages - known as giffa in Tigrinya - are common and constitute a kind of modern press-ganging. Anyone of age found without the relevant documents exempting them from national service is taken to the military camps of Sawa and Wi’a for training…even aside from evaders and
deserters, any civilian who forgets their identification or travel documents is at particular risk of being rounded up in a giffa and arbitrarily detained.’ [29c] (pages 48-49)
9.39 The British Embassy in Asmara, in a letter dated 11 October 2010 (Annex G), provided the following information, obtained from Eritrean sources:
‘Occasionally, the local authorities [Kebelles] issue letters to those who have not entered into the military urging them to do so. Round-ups are normally carried out by the military…the most common form of assistance is through informing the military of any individuals who have not undertaken military training. They usually get this
information through ‘informants’. The Kebelles distribute call-up papers to those found in breach of the rules on military training.’
9.40 The British Embassy in Asmara, in a letter dated 1 April 2010 (Annex E), provided the following information, obtained from Eritrean sources:
‘It is important to note that there are no set government policies or standard
procedures regarding how round-ups are organised. Military service round-ups take place usually around 4 to 5 times a year but can occur more frequently or less
frequently, and usually coincide with public holidays when large numbers of people are out and about. They can occur in various parts of Eritrea and are not confined to one particular part of it. Once rounded up, people are sent from Asmara to the Adi Abeto camp for processing and onward assignment.’
9.41 The same source (Annex E) explained that conscripts are taken to the Adi Abeto camp after being rounded up, according to information obtained from Eritrean sources.
Information in the HRW ‘Service for Life - State Repression and Indefinite Conscription in Eritrea’ report, published on 16 April 2009, [29c] (p48-49), and an Awate report,
‘Eritrean regime rounds up thousands of Keren youth’, dated 12 March 2007, indicated that conscripts had been taken to other military camps. [27c]
9.42 An article written by Dr David Bozzini, ‘Low-tech Surveillance and the Despotic State in Eritrea’ published in ‘Surveillance and Society’ in 2011, noted that:
‘…some conscripts worked out in 2006 that round-ups were intensifying while the President was abroad and University graduates incorporated into the civil service believed that they were especially targeted by Military Police because their educational background made them especially menacing for the leadership. Nobody knows where and when the next round-up will happen since the effectiveness of military actions depends mainly on surprise, but Eritreans try a posteriori to read between the lines of police violence, interpreting the latest round-up as an action taken against a particular group of people. Afterwards, it becomes clear that round-ups targeted secondary schools to capture students considered too old to continue their studies, while others raids were considered to have especially targeted women because military officers were in need of new maids.’ [33b] (p105)
Return to contents Go to sources
Authorised leave
9.43 The British Embassy in Asmara, in a letter dated 1 April 2010 (Annex E), provided the following information, obtained from Eritrean sources:
‘There are no standard rules with regard to leave. Individuals have no entitlement to leave, and cannot request it, but can be given it arbitrarily by local commanding officers.
If a military commander authorises leave for an individual, documents are issued specifying where that person may travel to and for how long (usually one month maximum). We do not know whether leave papers are issued in a printed standard format or are handwritten.’
Conscientious objection
9.44 The United States State Department ‘International Religious Freedom Report for 2012:
Eritrea’, published on 20 May 2013, stated that: ‘The law does not provide for
conscientious objector status, nor are there alternative activities for persons willing to perform national service, but unwilling to engage in military activities.’ [3c] (section 2) 9.45 The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) ‘Eligibility Guidelines for
Assessing the International Protection Needs of Asylum-seekers from Eritrea’,
published on 20 April 2011, stated that: ‘No alternative or substitute service is available to those objecting for reasons of conscience, including members of the Jehovah’s Witness movement who cannot, in accordance with their faith, carry arms. Those who object can face extreme physical punishment as a means of forcing them to perform military service.’ [32a] (p17)
9.46 The Amnesty International report, ‘Eritrea - 20 years of Independence, but still no freedom’, published on 9 May 2013, stated that: ‘There is no exemption from military service for conscientious objectors. The government of Eritrea has not designed any service alternative to military service.’ [6c] (page 25)
See also Jehovah’s Witnesses.
Return to contents
Go to sources
Students and conscription
9.47 The United States State Department ‘2012 Human Rights Report: Eritrea’, published on 19 April 2013, stated: ‘The government requires all students who reached the final year of secondary school to attend grade 12 at the Sawa educational and military camp in the western section of the country. Students who did not attend this final year did not graduate and could not take examinations for advanced education, although they could attend vocational schools. Some persons who attempted to leave the country did so to avoid going to the Sawa camp.’ [3b] (section 6)
9.48 The HRW ‘Service for Life - State Repression and Indefinite Conscription in Eritrea’
report, published on 16 April 2009, stated:
‘The preferred method of the Eritrean government is to conscript students into national service straight from school, unless they are continuing higher education. To this end, the final year of secondary school was moved to Sawa military camp in 2003. This 12th grade takes place only in Sawa, under military authority, and incorporating military training. Although many 12th grade students are 18 years old, or less, some are older because they take longer to finish high school. Each round or intake of students incorporates 8,000 to 9,000 students.
‘Once they are in the camp, however, military service effectively starts then and there. A teacher whose national service involved teaching in Sawa told Human Rights Watch,
‘The students could not study. They were always being forced to leave the class for some kind of military service.’ A former student said he did not even enter 12th grade but was ordered straight into national service in July 2007 even though he was less than 18 years old.’ [29c] (p50)
9.49 The military authorities have made it difficult for students to escape from Sawa or to avoid military training, as noted in the HRW ‘Service for Life’ report:
‘National service is deeply unpopular, especially because new recruits know that there is no prospect of it ending. Students have started escaping from Sawa camp during their 12th grade year without completing school. Escape is no mean feat, because, as described above, Sawa is in effect a huge prison. Those who made it described braving machine gun fire, barbed wire fences, and several days of walking through the desert without food and water.
‘Some students, aware of their fate once they reach 12th grade have begun to deliberately fail classes so that they can remain in the lower grades. Government awareness of this practice has been to simply pull anyone of military age - 18 and above - out of school altogether, even though it is normal for some students to take extra years to finish school because they are poor or work on family farms…Wi’a is reportedly the camp where the “not so clever” students go. If it appears that a student will not graduate [from] high school anyway, then the government will send him to Wi’a even before he has finished. One former student who was sent to Sawa explained, ‘In school, if you are absent more than two weeks, you get sent to Wi’a - for whatever reason. Sawa is supposed to be for educated people. If you get kicked out of school, you are not fit for education anyway, so you go to Wi’a.’ [29c] (pages 50-51)
See Children - Child labour; Children - Military service.
Return to contents Go to sources
Exemptions
9.50 The British Embassy in Asmara, in a letter dated 11 October 2010 (Annex G), obtained the following information from Eritrean sources about exemptions:
‘Normally, married women or women with young children are exempt from military service as are those registered disabled. The elderly have usually completed their national service, but if conflict ensues they could be expected to take up arms. Military commanders are able to authorise medical exemptions, with a report from a military medical officer. There are no exemptions for those from a poor background or those who have family members dependent on them through age or illness.’