members of the armed forces, who given their professional background, could not be expected to hand down an impartial verdict. 3.6 The author terms the appointment of the civilian members of the Supreme Military Court "a joke", pointing out that the "civilian" members of the Supreme Military Court who had been appointed in accordance with the rules of procedure used to serve in the highest ranks of the armed forces during their professional careers and upon retirement became the "civilian" members of the Supreme Military Court. State party's observations and author's clarifications 4.1 The State party notes that a State's right to require its citizens to perform military service/ or substitute service in the case of conscientious objectors whose grounds for objection are recognized by the State, is, as such., not contested, Reference is made to article 8/ paragraph 3 (c) (ii), of the Covenant. 4.2 The Government takes the view that the independence and impartiality of the Supreme Military Court in the Netherlands is guaranteed by the following procedures and provisions: (a) The president and the member jurist of the Supreme Military Court are judges in the Court of Appeal (Gerechtshof> in The Hague, and remain president and member jurist as long as they are members of the Court of Appeal; (b) The military members of the Supreme Military Court are appointed by the Crown. They are discharged after reaching the age of 70; (c) The military members of the Supreme Military Court do not hold any function in the military hierarchy. Their salaries are paid by the Ministry of Justice; (d) The president and the members of the Supreme Military Court have to take an oath before they can take up their appointment. They swear or vow to act in a fair and impartial way; (e) The president and the members of the Supreme Military Court do not owe any obedience nor are they accountable to any one regarding their decisions; (f) As a rule the sessions of the Supreme Military Court are public. 4.3 The State party points out that national and international judgements have confirmed the impartiality and independence of the military courts in the Netherlands. Reference is made to the Enqel Case of the European Court of Human Rights a./ ana to the judgement of the Supreme Court of the Netherlands of 17 May 1988. 4.4 With regard to the exhaustion of domestic remedies the State party claims that the Act on Conscientious Objection to Military Service (Wet Gewetensbezwaren Militaire Dienst) is an effective remedy to insuperable objections to military service. The State party contends that as the author has not invoked the Act, he has thus failed to exhaust domestic remedies. -413-