Cuttting Of Choridar Pajama

PORTILLO

Read the full ruling here:

Portillo

The Court of Appeals in Federal Criminal and upheld the lower court decision that ordered Alfredo Portillo to provide one year of continuous service in the armed forces over the legal time provided by law 17,531 for failing to report to the Military District call Buenos Aires. Against this statement concluded Portillo extraordinary appeal on the grounds that the compulsory introduction violated his freedom of ideology and conscience, recognized by Article 14 of the Constitution.

The Supreme Court found that the 17,531 law, military service, was in keeping with the requirements inherent in the title of citizen. The question lay under review, the Court, in a tension between rights and obligations enshrined in two constitutional provisions, as the actor pretended not to service conscription 17,531 imposed by law, to regulate the constitutional obligation imposed by arming to defend the Nation and the Magna Carta and the right to freedom of belief, enshrined in art. 14 of the Constitution.
The possible injury to the legitimate belief of a citizen by the obligation of military service can also reach those who still do not profess any religious beliefs have established a scale of values \u200b\u200bbetween which occupies an important place of not compromising life of a human.
The Court held that the failure of the constitutional obligation to take up arms to defend the nation does not imply a grave and imminent danger to the interests protected by the State, as the service required to be performed in times of peace, and held that there was absolutely necessary to limit the freedom of conscience of the individual citizen to fulfill his duties while he was respected their autonomy, as would be provided an alternative service. The Court recognized that one can not ignore this area of \u200b\u200bautonomy, or weaken the effectiveness of the military service law allowing certain citizens are bound by what rules law, when in reality they can do what the standard imposes.
The Court held that although the rights are relative and are reasonable limitation on the laws that regulate, stressed that the obligations are as well, then freedom of conscience on, must be reconciled with the obligation, relative to arm. On this point the Court said in its own right arm is to dress up arms, but in a sense analogous is made available to assist the wearer through a wide range of services that by their nature allow citizens to meet their debt with the State while preserving uninjured area of \u200b\u200bautonomy as their religious or ethical person. For all this the Court's majority held the view of the original ruling as Alfredo Portillo condemned to one year of service plus the time allowed by art. 34 of the 17,531 to find justification for its refusal to report for military district, but withdrew from the Chamber as soon established that the method of compliance should not involve the use of weapons, paying a substitute service. Dissent

Dr. Caballero
Conscientious objection without merit because the imposition of military service did not prevent the appellant freely practice their religion, nor disclose or learn their creed.