Conscription 2026: what do conscripts, employers and students need to know?

A new version of the Law on Military Conscription and Alternative National Defence Service will enter into force on 1 January 2026. The main innovations of the reform have already been presented: the age limit for conscripts will be lowered to 21 years (inclusive), service will be deferred only for students who enrol in higher education before they are included in the list of conscripts, and the duration of service will be differentiated: it will remain at 9 months, but can be reduced to 6 months, and representatives of the missing specialties will perform a 3-month basic service. For students, there is a choice between shorter specialised programmes (e.g. NCWM) or regular service.

Only the main outlines of the reform have been publicly presented, but certain important aspects have remained unaddressed. Many practical questions are still unanswered. Sandra Mickienė, Senior Associate at AVOCAD, comments on these less publicised and undiscussed aspects .

Changes for those who avoid compulsory initial military service

Under the previous version of the law, only administrative and criminal liability measures were provided for the prevention of evasion of service, which in practice did not always ensure the effective fulfilment of conscripts' obligations - some conscripts chose to pay an administrative fine and wait until the end of the draft age (up to and including 23 years of age). The new version of the Law introduced additional measures: the age of conscription for persons who were assigned to perform compulsory initial military service but failed to do so has been raised to 30 years (inclusive), and such persons have been classified in the first group of conscripts, which will result in their more frequent and preferential inclusion in the lists. According to the lawyer, this means that the risk of evaders facing not only administrative but also criminal liability increases significantly.

Additional incentives for conscripts

Cash benefits will be paid only to those conscripts who will be assigned to perform the normal 9-month compulsory initial military service or the 3-month service after completing the missing professions of the Lithuanian Armed Forces. As before, the amount of the allowances will depend on the assessment of the service (2-4 BSI), but what is new is that the cash allowances will be increased by as much as 3 times for conscripts who have completed 7-9 months of service and for those who have completed the 3 months of service for those who have completed the shortage professions.

Reimbursement of driving courses has also been introduced: conscripts who have completed 9 months of service will be reimbursed the cost of a B-category course (up to 10 BSIs), provided that the right to drive is acquired within 12 months of the end of service. A proposal to extend the reimbursement to Category A and C courses is under consideration in the Parliament, thus further enhancing the attractiveness and motivation of the service.

Changes for employers

The previous version of the law did not regulate situations in which an employer retains a job for a conscript who is performing compulsory initial military service but does not return to it after the service. The new version provides for a one-month wage subsidy for the employer in such a case. The procedure for calculating the subsidy is also changed. Instead of the previous 6 months, the subsidy will be paid in proportion to the length of service, i.e. a subsidy of 0.67 months per month of service. Moreover, it will only apply to conscripts who have completed their basic military training, so those who have not performed their service properly could be excluded from the subsidy.

A description of the procedure for the payment of the subsidy for the wages of conscripts who have completed their compulsory initial military service is currently being finalised, which will set out the procedure for granting the subsidy, the documents required and the deadlines for decisions. As an innovation, the subsidy should be paid not only in the case of recruitment of conscripts with continuous service (e.g. 9 months), but also in instalments (e.g. 160-200 days), with additional rules for the calculation of the subsidy. As before, the subsidy will apply if the conscript is employed or returns to work within 3 months of the end of his/her service, and the amount of the subsidy will be up to 100 % of the salary and social security contributions, but not exceeding 1.17 MMA.

So when will the conscription list be published in 2026?

From 2026, the new version of the law switches from calendar to annual lists of conscripts. However, neither the law nor the existing sub-legislation specify the exact period to be covered by the annual list and when it must be drawn up and published. The Explanatory Memorandum states that the period of conscription is planned to run from July of the current year to July of the following year, but it does not have the force of law and its provisions are not always implemented in practice.

From an army perspective, it is unlikely that the 2026 list will be published only in July, as this would create a long period without a call-up and would not provide the necessary capacity. According to AVOCAD's legal counsel, 2026 is likely to be a transitional year, so the list will be published in January as usual. She said that such uncertainty is understandably worrying and problematic for young people, so it is recommended to actively monitor official sources of information and keep up to date with information on conscription.

When will 17-year-olds be screened after the new law comes into force?

Neither the law nor sub-legislation specifically sets a time limit for the medical examination of 17-year-olds. The provisions of the law itself are not fully harmonised, which leads to a conflict of interpretation: some provisions suggest that the screening must be carried out before listing, others that it must be carried out after listing.

It has been publicised that once a person reaches the age of 17, he or she will have to apply to the Military Conscription Service, provide contact details and be given a screening date. The health check will inform the young person of his or her suitability or unsuitability for service. Eligible persons will be called up when they reach the age of 18 and have completed secondary school, while those who are not eligible will not be called up. However, this information is not confirmed by the new wording of the law, which stipulates that it is the annual list of conscripts that will publish the address of the health care facility and the date on which the conscript must attend for a medical check-up.

As the rules on medical screening of 17-year-olds are already applicable as of 1 January 2025, it remains unclear whether adjustments will be made to the sub-legislation or whether the mechanism developed in practice will continue to be applied, whereby only an initial medical screening of 17-year-olds is carried out prior to their inclusion in the lists of conscripts, in order to document and immediately exclude those who are unfit for military service, and a physical examination will be performed once the conscript has been placed on the list. From a financial and human resources perspective, it is most likely that the latter mechanism will continue. In any case, this uncertainty is negative, as it does not ensure that young people have timely access to the relevant information they need to properly plan the conscription process.

Uncertainties on the grounds for deferral

The new version of the law retains the possibility to postpone service if it would cause disproportionate damage to the conscript's personal or public interests. However, this clause has been supplemented by another provision which raises practical implementation issues. The additional provision states that these conscripts shall not be deferred from compulsory initial military service if the normal 9-month period of compulsory military service would cause disproportionate harm, but the harm could be avoided by serving under the UCMJ or other approved programmes.

The aim is clear: to prevent abuses, while at the same time enabling a higher number of trained conscripts. However, the changes raise practical questions: will conscripts have to prove that they are unable to perform their service not only in the normal way, but also in an alternative way, or will this be assessed by the army on its own initiative? As the UKVM programmes are aimed at students and graduates, it remains unclear how this basis would apply to conscripts who do not belong to either of these categories.

In addition, a new, almost identical ground for deferment has been introduced for conscripts who would suffer disproportionate damage to their personal or public interests by performing the normal 9-month service, but who could be avoided by serving under the UKVM or another programme, provided that the number of servicemen who will perform compulsory initial military service under the said programmes is called up in the current year, as set by the Minister of National Defence.

It is not at all clear how this latter provision differs in practice from the basis discussed above (in both cases, programmes must be in place and numbers must be published in order to participate), and therefore when one basis should be used and when the other.

Both the NCVM and the other programmes will have quotas - so not everyone will be able to get in. The question is: if a person who is unable to serve for objective reasons ends up on the list of conscripts and applies for deferment, but there are no places available in any of the programmes, will he or she be deferred in that case? Objectively speaking, service should be postponed in such a case, but the provisions of the law do not provide clear answers, which leads to interpretative uncertainties. It is to be hoped that the sub-legislation will be clarified in the near future to clearly delineate the limits of the application of these grounds and to remove practical uncertainties.

There is also some uncertainty regarding other grounds for deferment, for example, the law provides for individual deferment of service for pupils in primary or secondary education, unless they will be completing primary, secondary or formal vocational training at the time of the call-up in the relevant year. A systematic assessment of the provisions of the law would suggest that a 17-year-old who is in school and is due to graduate in that school year could already be on the list of conscripts. However, the use of the term 'will finish' raises a question: if a 17-year-old is placed on the list before he finishes school, but does not finish school, would the conscription procedures be suspended so that he could finish school? Would he be forced to suspend his education and do his military service first?

There are also questions about students. The new version of the law stipulates that service will be deferred only for students who enrol in higher education before their inclusion in the annual list of conscripts. However, the law does not define which moment constitutes "enrolment" - receipt of an invitation to sign a study contract, signing of the contract or entry in the register of students. Objectively speaking, there could be only a few days difference between the invitation and the signing, so that a student who received an invitation to study but did not have time to sign the contract and a student who did have time to sign the contract would be treated differently. The young person has no control over the entry of the data in the student register, and therefore may not be entered in the student register on time through no fault of his/her own.

The legal framework should be clear so that people can plan their future well and have a clear understanding of their rights and obligations. Therefore, such uncertain situations should not be dealt with solely on the basis of internal acts available to the armed forces, but should be dealt with by clear rules in sub-legislative acts, which is precisely the purpose of such acts. It is to be hoped that the recruitment procedure and other implementing legislation will be revised in the near future to address all these issues.