The right to conscientious objection in ECtHR case-law before and after the Bayatyan case: a paradigm shift?

Art. 9 of the European Convention of Human Rights does not expressly provide for a right to conscientious objection. According to the European Court, an act can be protected by art. 9 whenever « a sufficiently close and direct nexus » exists with the underlying belief ; at the same time, not every act motivated or inspired by a belief falls under art. 9’s coverage. In the case of conscientious objection, the combination of these two principles led to different outcomes according both to the historical moment, both to the kind of objection considered. The paper firstly retraces the developments in the European Court case-law in respect of the different forms of conscientious objection, assuming as a turning point the judgment in the case Bayatyan v. Armenia. Then it tries to answer the question, whether this judgment has, or has not, marked a paradigm shift in the Court’s approach to the recognition of the right to conscientious objection