In addition to these general human rights commitments, there are three specific areas in which the participating States have agreed commitments referring to members of the armed forces. First, participating States have pledged to consider introducing alternatives to military service (Copenhagen 1990 and Budapest 1994; conscientious objection is discussed further in Chapter 10). Second, states have made commitments on the minimum age of recruitment to the armed forces. At Copenhagen in 1990, states agreed to consider acceding to the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child where they had not yet done so. States have also committed to reviewing whether their practices for the recruitment or call-up of personnel for service in their military, paramilitary, and security forces are consistent with their human rights obligations (Budapest 1994). Third, states have made commitments to give legal protection to human rights for members of the armed forces. These find their fullest expression under the OSCE Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security (Budapest 1994). 4. OSCE Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security: Key Features The OSCE Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security was adopted by the Forum for Security Co-operation in Budapest on 3 December 1994.20 It came into effect as a politically binding document on 1 January 1995. The Code of Conduct was the first multilateral instrument to regulate the armed forces at both the domestic and international levels. Its rationale is that the democratic control of armed forces is “an indispensable element of stability and security and an important expression of democracy” (para. 20). It adopts an innovative approach that bridges both the human and military dimensions of security. Moreover, the Code applies to military and defence policies both in peacetime and in times of conflict: this is an important acceptance by the governments of participating States of limitations in an area traditionally seen as their own preserve. The Code of Conduct embodies four key principles: the primacy of constitutional civilian power over military power (paras. 21-26); the subjection of armed forces to international humanitarian law (paras. 29-31 and 34-35); respect for the human rights of members of the armed forces (paras. 23, 27-28, and 32-33); and limits over the domestic use of force to what is commensurate to their legal mission and restricting interference with the peaceful and lawful exercise of human rights (paras. 36-37). It can be seen, then, that the Code of Conduct takes a dual approach to human rights. First, participating States are to ensure that their armed forces respect the human rights of civilians and follow international humanitarian law. For example, care must be taken to avoid injury to civilians, and the use of force must be proportionate. Individual members of the military must be accountable for any violations of international law. Equally, the human rights of members of the armed forces themselves are to be protected by states. This means that domestic legislation must be in place establishing effective procedures to safeguard their rights, whether through the courts or through other independent means, such as a military ombudsman. The provisions of the Code of Conduct concerning human rights are summarized in Box 4.2. As can be seen from para. 23, dealing with political neutrality, and para. 32, providing that members of the armed forces should enjoy the standard human rights and fundamental freedoms embodied in OSCE documents and international law “in conformity with relevant constitutional and legal provisions and with the requirements of service”, the 20  For the complete text, see <http://www.osce.org/documents/fsc/1994/12/4270_en.pdf>; for commentary, see Ghébali and Lambert, op. cit., note 2. 29 Handbook on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms of Armed Forces Personnel