Indefinite Military Conscription in Eritrea: The UN Called It Enslavement

Last updated: 15 October 2026

Photo: Soviet Tank - David Stanley

Indefinite conscription in Eritrea is one of the most extreme forms of forced labour in the world today. The government calls it "national service," but in practice it is a system that traps citizens for decades. What begins as an 18-month obligation under the law never ends. Some people have been serving for over 20 years. The United Nations Commission of Inquiry investigated this system and concluded that it amounts to enslavement — a crime against humanity. This report examines how Eritrea indefinite conscription works, what happens at the Sawa training camp, and why this issue matters for asylum claims.

The evidence in this report comes from the UN Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea, UNHCR, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, and testimony from former conscripts. For a broader overview of the country, see our Eritrea country report.

Background: From 18 Months to a Lifetime

The legal foundation of Eritrea's national service is Proclamation 82/1995. This law requires all Eritrean citizens between the ages of 18 and 50 to complete 18 months of national service. The first six months are military training. The remaining 12 months are either military duty or work in government projects like construction, farming, or teaching. On paper, this sounds like a normal military service programme. In reality, it is nothing like it.[1]

The 1998-2000 border war with Ethiopia changed everything. The government declared a state of emergency and extended national service indefinitely. When the war ended, the extensions did not stop. The government simply kept people in service. Year after year, decade after decade. There was no formal law extending the service — the government simply refused to release conscripts. By 2025, some individuals drafted in the late 1990s are still serving. They have lost more than 25 years of their lives to forced state labour.

The government has never explained when service will end. There is no discharge process. There is no appeal. Conscripts cannot resign, retire, or negotiate their release. Their lives are entirely controlled by the state. This is why the UN Commission of Inquiry used the word "enslavement" — because the conditions meet the legal definition of that crime under international law.[2]

Who Must Serve

Eritrea indefinite conscription applies to all citizens between 18 and 50 years old. Both men and women must serve. There are very few exceptions. Women who are married or pregnant can be released from active military duty, but they may still be assigned to government work. People with severe disabilities may be exempt. In practice, the military decides who serves and who does not, and these decisions are often arbitrary.

The conscription system catches young people early. Since 2003, the government has required all students to complete their final year of secondary school (12th grade) at the Sawa military training camp. This means that children as young as 16 or 17 are sent to a military facility. At Sawa, they combine schoolwork with military training. After finishing school, they are immediately drafted into national service. Many never return home. This system means that Eritrea effectively conscripts children and turns them into soldiers before they become adults.[3]

Sawa Military Training Camp

Sawa is a large military camp in the western lowlands of Eritrea, near the border with Sudan. It serves as both a school and a military training facility. Every year, thousands of young Eritreans are sent there. Conditions at Sawa are harsh and abusive. Former conscripts who have escaped Eritrea describe a place of fear and suffering.[4]

Training includes forced marches, physical punishment, and strict military discipline. Punishment for minor offences — such as being late or talking back — can include being tied in painful positions, beaten, or forced to do extreme physical exercises in the desert heat. Food is poor and medical care is minimal.

Sexual violence against women at Sawa is a serious and well-documented problem. Female conscripts are vulnerable to abuse by military commanders. The UN Commission of Inquiry found that sexual violence, including rape, is used as a form of control and punishment. Women who resist or report abuse face further punishment. Many women try to become pregnant to get released from Sawa, because pregnancy is one of the few ways women can end their military service.[5]

The education component at Sawa is of poor quality. Students take their national exams there, and the results determine whether they go to university or directly into the military or government work. However, very few students score high enough for university. Most are assigned to military units or government jobs, beginning their indefinite service immediately after their exams.

After Sawa: Decades of Forced Service

After completing training at Sawa, conscripts are assigned to different sectors. Some remain in the military. Others are placed in government ministries, construction projects, farms, or other state enterprises. In all cases, the key feature is the same: there is no end date. Conscripts cannot choose their assignment. They cannot leave. They cannot negotiate their conditions. They are, in effect, the property of the state.[6]

Pay is extremely low. Conscripts receive between 450 and 500 Eritrean Nakfa per month — about $30 at the official exchange rate. This is far below a living wage. Many conscripts have families that they cannot support. The government justifies the low pay by saying that national service is a patriotic duty. In reality, the system provides the government with a massive pool of forced labour at almost no cost.

Conditions vary depending on the assignment. Those in the military face combat duty, especially during the Tigray conflict (2020-2022) when Eritrean forces were deployed in northern Ethiopia. Those assigned to government work face long hours, poor conditions, and no rights. Conscripts cannot own businesses, travel freely within the country, or plan for their future. Many describe the experience as living without hope.

National Service Key Facts

UN Commission of Inquiry Findings

In 2014, the UN Human Rights Council created a Commission of Inquiry to investigate human rights in Eritrea. The Commission published two major reports, in 2015 and 2016. Its findings were devastating. The Commission concluded that the Eritrean government commits crimes against humanity through its national service system and related practices. Specifically, the Commission found evidence of enslavement, imprisonment, enforced disappearance, torture, persecution, rape, and murder.[7]

The indefinite duration of national service, the use of conscripts as forced labourers in state-owned or state-controlled enterprises, and the near-impossibility of being released amount to enslavement of a significant part of the population.
UN Commission of Inquiry on Human Rights in Eritrea, A/HRC/32/47, 2016

The Commission recommended that the situation be referred to the International Criminal Court (ICC) for prosecution. However, this referral requires a vote in the UN Security Council. As of 2025, no referral has taken place. The Eritrean government rejected the Commission's findings entirely and called the reports politically motivated. It refused to cooperate with the investigation and denied the Commission access to the country.[8]

Penalties for Evasion and Desertion

Eritreans who try to avoid or escape national service face severe punishment. The penalties are designed to make evasion impossible and to spread fear throughout the population. If you are caught trying to avoid conscription, you face imprisonment in a military camp. Conditions in these camps are brutal. Detainees are held in underground cells, metal shipping containers, or open-air enclosures. Torture is routine.[9]

Deserters — those who leave after being conscripted — face even harsher treatment. They can be shot on sight if caught while trying to flee. If captured alive, they are imprisoned and tortured. Common torture methods include the "helicopter" position (hands and feet tied together behind the back), the "Jesus Christ" position (tied to a tree with arms spread), and prolonged beating. Some deserters have died in custody as a result of torture.

No Right to Conscientious Objection

Eritrea does not recognize the right to refuse military service on grounds of conscience. There is no alternative civilian service for those who object to bearing arms for moral, religious, or ethical reasons. Everyone must serve. This affects religious groups in particular. Jehovah's Witnesses, who refuse military service as a matter of faith, face indefinite detention. Three Jehovah's Witnesses — Paulos Eyassu, Isaac Mogos, and Negede Teklemariam — have been in prison since September 1994 for refusing to serve. They have never been charged or tried. They are among the longest-held prisoners of conscience in the world.[10]

The absence of conscientious objection is important for asylum claims. International law recognizes the right to refuse military service on grounds of conscience. When a country punishes conscientious objectors with imprisonment and torture, this can amount to persecution. UNHCR has stated clearly that Eritrean conscientious objectors are in need of international protection.

UNHCR Position on Eritrea Indefinite Conscription

UNHCR considers that all Eritreans who have fled or who fear being subjected to national service are in need of international protection. This includes draft evaders (those who left before being conscripted), deserters (those who left during service), and anyone who fears being conscripted. UNHCR's position is based on the finding that the punishment for evasion or desertion is disproportionate and amounts to persecution.[11]

Furthermore, UNHCR considers that the conditions of national service itself — indefinite duration, forced labour, extremely low pay, physical abuse, and sexual violence — constitute persecution. This means that even people who have not yet evaded service but fear being subjected to it can qualify for international protection.

Implications for Asylum Claims

Eritrea indefinite conscription is one of the strongest grounds for asylum claims from Eritrean nationals. Decision-makers and expert witnesses should consider several key points. First, the UN has found that the national service system constitutes crimes against humanity. This is the highest possible finding by an international body. Second, UNHCR recommends that all Eritreans fleeing national service receive international protection.

Third, the punishment for evasion or desertion is disproportionate — imprisonment, torture, and family punishment. This disproportionate punishment transforms what might otherwise be a legitimate state obligation into persecution. Fourth, there is no conscientious objection right. Anyone who objects to serving faces indefinite detention. Fifth, the conditions of service — forced labour, sexual violence, extreme low pay, and no end date — are themselves persecutory.

In the UK, the country guidance case MST and Others (national service — risk categories) Eritrea CG [2008] UKAIT 00002 confirmed that returned Eritrean asylum seekers face a real risk of being subjected to national service, and that the conditions of service amount to serious harm. For human rights advocates and legal practitioners, this remains the key legal authority on Eritrean national service claims.[12]

Our Eritrea country expert witness reports set out how indefinite conscription and forced labour apply to a particular claimant, including draft evaders and deserters facing return.

Conclusion

Eritrea indefinite conscription is not military service in any normal sense of the term. It is a system of state-controlled forced labour that traps hundreds of thousands of people for decades. The UN called it enslavement. The conditions involve torture, sexual violence, starvation pay, and no hope of release. Anyone who tries to escape faces imprisonment, torture, and collective punishment against their family. For asylum decision-makers, the evidence is clear and unambiguous: people fleeing this system deserve international protection.