Bermudians Against the Draft (B.A.D.) will discover on Monday whether they have won their fight to get conscription outlawed.

The campaign group has been fighting since 2006 to get the policy abolished, and has lost cases in the Supreme Court and Court of Appeal.

In February, it went to Bermuda's highest court the Privy Council in London to have the case heard once again. The ruling is due to be issued by the Privy Council at 11 a.m. British time (7 a.m. Bermuda time) on Monday.

Founder of B.A.D., Larry Marshall, has previously described himself as optimistic about the outcome. However, he explained yesterday that even if it does not go their way "there are other options for B.A.D., such as the European Court of Human Rights or action locally focusing on the issue of constitutionality".

The controversial policy of making men serve in the Regiment has been in place since it was formed in 1965, enjoying the support of successive governments and governors.

Hundreds of recruits, ranging in age from 18 to 32, are conscripted each year when their names are selected by a random ballot. They are subject to being arrested, fined or even jailed if they refuse to serve.

B.A.D., which consists of 14 men contesting their conscription into the Regiment, hopes to get mandatory military service abolished for good.

They were represented by top British lawyer Jonathan Crow QC, when they made their appeal to the Privy Council, which hinges on three key points.

The first Mr. Crowe argued was that the policy is discriminatory under the Human Rights Act because only men, and not women, are forced to serve.

Both sexes can join the Regiment as volunteers, but only a handful do so each year. Government insists that conscription is the only way the Regiment can fulfil its functions.

If B.A.D. wins the Human Rights Act argument, that could get conscription outlawed as it affects all young Bermudian men.

Speaking ahead of the case, B.A.D.'s Bermuda-based lawyer Delroy Duncan told The Royal Gazette: "If the appeal succeeds on the discrimination argument, which is that conscription only applies to men and not women, then the conscription regime in Bermuda would be unlawful."

He added: "You only have to look at comments made by past governors and ministers of Labour and Home Affairs about their view on whether conscription has a place in Bermuda to see that conscription is of enormous significance. There are obviously generations to come that will be affected by the Privy Council decision either way."

The other arguments only apply specifically to the men of B.A.D. and not all men in Bermuda who are conscripted.

The first of those is that Government is obligated to take "reasonable steps" to recruit volunteers of both sexes before resorting to conscription. Mr. Crowe suggested this could be achieved through recruitment campaigns and offering a more attractive package of benefits.

The third argument Mr. Crow made was that Government failed to answer letters from B.A.D. inquiring about issues such as how big the Regiment needs to be, and what efforts have been made to recruit volunteers. He argued that a public body, which is taking liberty away, has a duty to be candid and provide the court with all relevant information.