Mandatory Conscription is a practice adopted by several countries where the citizens of certain criteria are listed mandatorily in the military or other national services. This practice is defended by the states citing national security reasons predominantly. Though this practice is critiqued upon, the way this practice is undertaken in Eritrea is subject to massive criticism due to its behaviour of overlooking the basic fundamental rights of the human beings by having indefinite mandatory conscription, collective punishments for the relatives of the evaders, etc. In spite of such prima facie violation of the human rights in the state, the lack of any sort of effective intervention is alarming as to the existence of human rights principle on the whole in the globe. Human rights being implemented through international sources of law, there is a necessity for a balance between sovereignty and human rights in itself. In cases like this however, the concept of human rights is often hidden behind the shadows of sovereignty, where the meaning of human rights is lost. Hence it is vital to draw the line where the violations of human rights shall not be entertained for the purposes of sovereignty of the state. Through the research, the paper aims to contribute to the academic discourse on human rights and sovereignty, providing a nuanced understanding of the complexities involved in mandatory conscription and international intervention.
