Court-martial

A court-martial (plural courts-martial) is a military court that determines punishments for members of the military subject to military law. Virtually all militaries maintain a court-martial system to try cases in which a breakdown of military discipline may have occurred. In addition, courts-martial may be used to try enemy prisoners of war for war crimes. The Geneva Conventions require that POWs who are on trial for war crimes be subject to the same procedures as would be the holding army's own soldiers. Additionally, most navies have a standard court martial which convenes whenever a ship is lost; this does not necessarily mean that the captain is suspected of wrongdoing, but merely that the circumstances surrounding the loss of the ship would be made part of the official record. Many ship captains will actually insist on a court-martial in such circumstances.

Courts-martial in India

Indian Army has four kinds of Court Martial - General Court Martial (GCM), District Court Martial (DCM), Summary General Court Martial (SGCM) and Summary Court Martial (SCM)

Courts-martial in the United Kingdom

Summary offences are dealt with by the accused's commanding officer who acts as a magistrate. The accused may be admonished, reprimanded, fined, denied pay, have his/her privileges restricted or be detained for up to one month if convicted.

Serious offences are considered by a court-martial. The courts also consider cases when the accused is an officer or holds rank above that of his commanding officer, or when the accused demands such a trial. Prosecution is controlled not by the military, but by a Prosecuting Authority that is independent of the chain of command. The defendant's lawyer, furthermore, may be a civilian, and costs may be borne by the military.

There are two types of courts-martial: the District Court-Martial (DCM) which may punish the accused with up to two years imprisonment, and the General Court-Martial (GCM) which may punish the accused with up to life imprisonment if the offence is serious enough.

The District Court-Martial is composed of three members and the General Court-Martial of five members; in each case, one member is designated the President. The members may be warrant officers or commissioned officers. The members of the court judge the facts of the case, like a jury.

They may also determine the sentence, but in the civilian courts, that power is granted only to the judge. The court is presided over by a Judge Advocate who is normally a civilian judge. The present Judge-Advocate General is a Circuit Judge and the other Judge Advocates are Barristers in practice, who serve as Judge Advocates only on a part time basis. This is like a Recorder in the Crown Court. The presiding judge may instruct the members of the Court on questions of law and sentencing.

Appeal lies to the Courts-Martial Appeals Court, which may overturn a conviction or reduce a sentence. Thereafter, appeal lies to the highest court of the United Kingdom, the House of Lords (the case, like all others before the House, is only heard by a committee of judges known as Law Lords).

Officers convicted at a Court-Martial can be dismissed, with especially serious offenders dismissed in disgrace and banned from serving Her Majesty in any capacity for life.

During World War I there were a further two Courts-Martial. The Regimental Court-Martial (RCM), which rarely sat, and the Field General Court-Martial (FGCM). The FGCM consisted of three officers, one of them normally a Major who acted as president.

There are currently no limits on sentence durations within the military, although it is generally followed that imprisonment should not exceed the limits set by a civilian court dealing with the same crime. However, significant changes to the system will be introduced after the passage of the Armed Forces Bill 2006.

Captial punishment

There is no capital punishment in the military. Prior to its complete abolition in 1998, it was available for six offences: Serious Misconduct in Action, Communicating with the Enemy, Aiding the Enemy or Furnishing Supplies, Obstructing Operations or Giving False Air Signals, Mutiny and Incitement to Mutiny or Failure to Suppress a Mutiny, but was never used after the general abolition of the death penalty, in 1965. See also Capital punishment in the United Kingdom

Courts-martial in the United States

As in all United States criminal courts, courts-martial are adversarial proceedings. That is, military lawyers representing the government and appointed military and/or civilian defense lawyers representing the accused. The lawyers present relevant facts, legal aspects, and arguments most favorable to their theory of the case. At trial, the lawyers must follow the military rules of procedure and evidence as allowed by the presiding judge. During these trial presentations, the military judge decides questions of law. The accused may elect to be tried by the military judge alone or by a jury. A court-martial jury is called a panel of members. This panel decides questions of fact as allowed by law, unless the accused chooses to be tried by judge alone, in which case the judge will resolve questions of law and questions of fact. Both the court-martial members and the military judge are members of the armed forces. Only a court-martial can determine innocence or guilt. General and special court-martial convictions are equivalent to federal court convictions, however, military specific crimes (such as disobeying orders) do not translate into civilian convictions. Some convictions in the military are considered felonies, but this depends on the law of the state in which the convicted works or resides. Military offenders that are convicted of violent sexual offenses or sexual offenses against minors will be required to register as sex offenders in most states.

Three levels of courts-martial can be convened depending on the severity of the offense(s): summary (which can confine junior enlisted to up to 30 days), special (which, depending on the charges, can confine an accused up to a year and give a bad-conduct discharge) and general (which, depending on the charges, can sentence an accused to death, life imprisonment and give a bad-conduct or dishonorable discharge).

Unlike federal courts established under Article III of the U.S. Constitution, a court-martial is established under Article I and does not exist until its creation is ordered by a commanding officer specifically authorized to do so by law. Such officers are called court-martial convening authorities. The legally operative document that a convening authority uses to create a court-martial is called a court-martial convening order.

General courts-martial requires an investigating officer, with at least the rank of captain (naval leiutenant), to hold an UCMJ Art32 hearing to review government evidence which outlines the elements of the alleged crime. In the Air Force and Navy the Investigating Officer is usually a JAG officer, in the Army it is usually a non-lawyer. The accused has the right to be present and to have an attorney to hear government evidence and examine testimony. The Article 32 hearing is a major discovery tool for the defense. The investigating officer then sends his/her report with recommendations to the convening authority, who may then refer the case for court-martial.

Convening authorities may decide on actions other than court-martial, especially when the government case is weak. The case may be dismissed or disposed of at a lower level, including administrative reprimands, summary courts-martial, non-judicial punishment, or administrative separation.

In most courts-martial the accused pleads guilty to at least some of the charges. Even in most cases where the accused pleads not guilty, the accused is convicted of at least some of the charges.

Courts-martial have universal jurisdiction over personnel, subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Under new laws to deal with contractors operating abroad with the armed forces, some civilians are also subject to the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

External links