UKRAINE: Military conscription and freedom of religion in Ukraine: Is it legal to mobilize a priest?
By Dr Ievgeniia Gidulyanova for Human Rights Without Frontiers
HRWF (20.06.2025) – On 10 June 2025, at a checkpoint in the Odesa region, there was an attempt to mobilize, against his will, Archpriest of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church/ Moscow Patriarchate (UOC/MP) Oleksandr Moskovchuk, rector of the Holy Trinity Church in the village of Troyandove, with 23 years in the priesthood.
The incident immediately sparked widespread public outcry. The Odesa diocese of the UOC MP reported psychological pressure exerted on the priest and claimed that “despite his age and poor health, as well as the canonical impossibility of bearing arms and legal ineligibility for mobilization,” he was coerced into signing a military service contract.
Subsequently, it became known that after four days of detention at the Territorial Center for Recruitment and Social Support (TCR), Archpriest Oleksandr Moskovchuk was released. He returned to his parish and expressed gratitude to the lawyers and to the Odesa Diocese for their support.
All is well that ends well,… or maybe not? This case once again raises a fundamental question: Where is the legal and moral boundary between national defense and the protection of basic rights and freedoms—specifically, freedom of conscience?
The fact of mobilization
According to official data from the Odesa Territorial Recruitment and Social Support Center (TCR), it was found during routine document checks at the checkpoint that Oleksandr Moskovchuk was not registered with the military and had no deferment from military duty. After voluntarily appearing at the TCR, he underwent a medical examination and was deemed fit for military service. Although he was offered the option of serving as a military chaplain, the archpriest declined and remained at the recruitment center.
The TRC emphasized that holding a clerical status does not automatically grant deferment from conscription.
Under the Law of Ukraine “On Mobilization Preparation and Mobilization,” the clergy may be granted deferment (i.e., “reservation”) from military duty by their religious organization if such organization is included in the official “List of Critically Important Institutions.” At the time of verification, no documents confirming Moskovchuk’s deferral or reservation were provided; this was corroborated by the AITS “Oberig” database, an automated mechanism of the Unified State Register of Conscripts and Reservists.
Formally, the actions of the TCR were in accordance with the current Ukrainian legislation. However, the case raises deeper legal and ethical questions.
Can a priest from the UOC/MP serve as a military chaplain?
According to Article 7, Part 3 of the Law of Ukraine “On Military Chaplaincy Service” , a man cannot be a military chaplain if he belongs to an organization that is part of a religious body with governing center located in a country that has committed an armed aggression against Ukraine and/or temporarily occupied part of Ukraine’s territory.
This means that participation in chaplaincy is legally possible only for representatives of religious organizations recognized by the state and authorized to serve in the Armed Forces.
Amid ongoing legal verification of the status of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church (Moscow Patriarchate), the involvement of its clergy in military chaplaincy remains legally ambiguous.
The State Service of Ukraine for Ethnic Policy and Freedom of Conscience (DESS) continues to examine whether the UOC is still affiliated with the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC), whose activity is banned in Ukraine. Until that verification is complete, the official appointment of UOC/ MP representatives as chaplains remains premature.
Therefore, does Moskovchuk’s refusal to become a chaplain constitute draft evasion—or is it a reflection of the broader legal uncertainty surrounding the religious body he represents?
Why was he not “reserved” or did he not receive a deferment?
On 6 June 2025, the DESS issued an order approving the list of religious organizations recognized as critically important to society during martial law. This list includes legal entities—religious organizations—that passed a screening process based on criteria adopted by the State Judicial Council on 5 February 2025 (Resolution No. H-21/11), and registered by the Ministry of Justice of Ukraine on 19 February 2025 (No. 263/43669). These criteria came into force on 20 March 2025, after publication in the Official Bulletin.
The list allows religious organizations to reserve their staff, including clergy, from military mobilization.
To qualify, a religious organization must meet the following criteria:
- Be registered in the Unified State Register of Legal Entities, Individual Entrepreneurs, and Public Formations with an identification code;
- Have been registered no later than 26 December 2024;
- Not be included in the list of religious organizations affiliated (as defined by article 5-1 of the Law of Ukraine “On Freedom of Conscience and Religious Organizations”) with foreign religious organizations banned in Ukraine;
- Be located outside temporarily occupied territories of Ukraine;
- Have a valid charter, especially regarding its official name;
- Be listed in the Registry of Non-Profit Institutions and Organizations;
- Have submitted a financial report for the previous fiscal (tax) year.
As reported by the DESS, an investigation is underway to determine whether the Kyiv Metropolis of the UOC—one of thousands of UOC organizations—is still affiliated, or not, with the Russian Orthodox Church.
Therefore, the verification of the status of a religious organization, affiliation or not with the Russian Orthodox Church, will be carried out sequentially, taking into account the results of the study in relation to the Kyiv Metropolis of the UOC.
The examination of this affiliation is ongoing and will determine whether the UOC organizations will be officially designated as affiliated with a banned foreign religious entity, or not.
Due to this continuing investigation, UOC/MP institutions are currently not listed in the “List of Critically Important Institutions” and therefore cannot legally request reservations for their clergy.
Formally, this explains why Oleksandr Moskovchuk was not granted deferment.
However, this raises a broader issue about the presumption of innocence: Is it legal or fair to apply restrictive measures before an official conclusion has been reached?
Freedom of conscience—Even during wartime
Article 35 of the Constitution of Ukraine guarantees every citizen freedom of religion. International humanitarian law, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, requires that even during states of emergency, core human rights standards are preserved; and freedom of religion is one of them.
The mobilization of a priest—especially amid legal ambiguity regarding the status of his religious organization—may be perceived as a violation of state neutrality in religious matters. It could also be seen as a form of implicit pressure on a religious community already facing legal and reputational challenges within the country.
Undoubtedly, Ukraine is going through one of the most difficult chapters in its history. National defense is a duty for every citizen. However, during wartime, it is especially important not to destroy the very principles the war is being fought over to protect them. Among these principles is the respect for human dignity, belief and freedom of conscience.
The conscription of clergy—especially those whose denominational affiliation is under legal scrutiny—demands a balanced approach, clear legal norms, and ongoing dialogue between the state and religious organizations.
Photo:Archpriest of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church/ Moscow Patriarchate (UOC/MP) Oleksandr Moskovchuk
