The Ombudswoman for Gender Equality, Višnja Ljubičić, has expressed concern over the proposed legislative amendments that would introduce mandatory two-month military training exclusively for men. She considers the proposal discriminatory as it treats citizens differently based on gender, which contradicts the Gender Equality Act. While women can participate voluntarily in military training, they would not be entitled to the benefits granted to men, potentially leading to unfairness in employment and other areas. The Ombudswoman also warns about discrimination against conscientious objectors. She proposes either the complete removal of all benefits for those who complete military training or the introduction of equal conditions for both men and women. This proposal has sparked various reactions in the public and media, with discussions focusing on gender equality, the constitutionality of the law, and the social implications of such regulation.
Political Perspectives:
Left: The left-leaning perspective emphasizes the discriminatory nature of the proposed mandatory military service for men only, highlighting issues of gender equality and the violation of women’s rights. It stresses the importance of equal treatment under the law and criticizes the proposal for reinforcing traditional gender roles and systemic discrimination. The left calls for either abolishing benefits related to military service or ensuring equal conditions for all genders.
Center: The centrist perspective acknowledges the legal and social concerns raised by the Ombudswoman but also considers the practical and security aspects of the military training proposal. It presents a balanced view, recognizing the need for national defense preparedness while urging lawmakers to address gender equality issues and ensure that the law complies with constitutional standards. The center calls for dialogue and possible amendments to make the law more inclusive and fair.
Right: The right-leaning perspective tends to support the proposal as a necessary measure for national security and defense readiness, often emphasizing traditional gender roles where men are primarily responsible for military service. It may downplay the claims of discrimination, arguing that the law is justified by practical considerations and that voluntary participation by women is sufficient. The right may also stress the importance of benefits for those who serve and view the proposal as a reinforcement of patriotic duty.
