Military justice (or military law ) is the body of law and procedure governing members of the armed forces. Many nation-states have separate and distinct legal entities that govern the behavior of members of their armed forces. Some countries use judicial and other special arrangements to enforce the law, while others use the civil justice system. Unique legal issues for military justice include discipline preservation and discipline, legality of command, and appropriate behavior for members of the military. Some countries allow their military justice system to deal with civil abuses committed by their armed forces in some circumstances.
Military justice differs from martial law, which is the imposition of military authority on civilians in lieu of civil authority, and is often expressed in times of emergency, war, or civil unrest. Most countries limit when and how military emergencies can be stated and enforced.
Video Military justice
Kanada
All Canadian Forces (CF) orders (ie, Canadian Navy, Canadian Army, Royal Canadian Air Force, Canada Joint Operation Command, and Canada Special Operations Forces Command) are governed by National Defense Act (NDA). Section 12 of the NDA § authorizes the governor in the conciliation of the Queen's Rules and Orders (QR & Os). QR & amp; Os is a subordinate legislation that has the power of law. Since the principle of delegatus non-potest delegare has not reached a rigid position in Canada, QR & amp; Os gives authorization to other military officials to produce orders of similar status, but not the same. These instruments can be found in the Order of the Canadian Forces Administration and the Defense and Instruction Administration Orders; they are used as directives for the CF authorities to regulate day-to-day considerations of the Forces. For example, cadets of officers attending military colleges are organized and subject to regulations that are more appropriate for their academic success than disciplinary enforcement, as might be expected of fully trained members. Volume IV, Annex 6.1 of the Queen's Regulations and Orders for Canadian Military College (QR Canmilcols) apply.
A general support judge (JAG) has headed the branch of Canadian military law since before the First World War. The branch office interprets the internal rules and rules of internal discipline of the Canadian Army, as well as international law and law and war codes, such as the Geneva Conventions. In Canadian practice, armed combat is a strictly regulated environment and legal officers are an important part of planning that goes into operational decisions. The Military Law Center on the grounds of the Royal Military College of Canada, which has a military attorney, oversees the education of officers and soldiers on legal matters, trains military lawyers and advises Ottawa on policy and doctrine issues. Legal education is integrated into regular training conducted by CF members.
Maps Military justice
Finnish
Jurisdiction
The Finnish military law concerns members of the Finnish Defense Forces and the Finnish Border Guard. Military jurisdiction includes all military personnel: conscription, student training for paid military positions, voluntary women and paid military personnel. However, military pastors are outside the jurisdiction of the criminal army. Reserves belong to military jurisdiction when activated voluntarily or unknowingly. Military jurisdiction begins from the moment when a person reports to an assignment or is responsible for reporting to a task and ends at a time when the person has quit the service and, in case of conscription and inadvertently activating the reserve forces, has also left the military territory.. During wartime, civilians who served in the Defense Forces or in civilian institutions that had been placed under the direction of the Defense Forces were under military jurisdiction. The enemy's prisoners of war fell under the jurisdiction of the Finnish military during their imprisonment.
Military crime
As in Germany, people under military jurisdiction are under common civilian criminal law. Military criminal law, Chapter 45 of the criminal law, covers only crimes that can only be committed by military personnel. The most important of these are the various types of "service crimes" (Finnish: palvelusrikos ) which includes all non-compliance and voluntary orders and regulations, "Guard crime "(Finland: vartiorikos ), encompasses every misbehavior while maintaining the duty, there is no absence (Finland: luvaton poissaolo ), desersi (Finnish: sotilaskarkuruus ), various forms of non-compliance with superiors, abuse of positions as superiors and behaviors that are not suitable for military people (Finland: sotilaalle sopimaton kÃÆ'¤yttÃÆ'¤ytyminen ). Other crimes are subject to ordinary civil law.
The military has jurisdiction to investigate all military crimes, as well as a number of other crimes specifically listed as belonging to military jurisdiction. This includes for example various types of killing, assault, theft, fraud, forgery, computer hacking and leaked confidential information illegally. However, they are only under military jurisdiction if the crime is committed against other military personnel or against the Defense Forces.
Unlike other crimes, military crimes have separate spans for peace and wartime. During the war, crime brought a much larger range of sentences and, if the crime caused a danger to the military unit, the punishment span was even harder. For example, a defect brings, in peace, disciplinary punishment or up to one year in prison. During the war, he carries a mandatory imprisonment of not more than four years, and, if the crime causes a very urgent danger to the unit, a mandatory minimum of one year, with a maximum period of ten years.
When the military has jurisdiction over ordinary crimes, and the crime carries good punishment, disciplinary punishment may be granted in exchange for both fines in the summary process and in a court of law.
Investigation and discipline summary
When the crime is under military jurisdiction, it is usually investigated by its own serviceman unit. During the investigation, the superior of the serviceman and the company commander had the power to detain the suspect. Commanders of battalions and military police officers also have the right to arrest suspects and conduct searches within military areas.
When the company commander or his superior feels that the crime is not trivial and requires a professional inquiry, they can raise the matter to the Defense Command for investigation. The Defense Command has, in addition to the power of arrest, the power to use almost any other action available to the Finnish police. If the Defense Command requires the use of the most invasive investigative measures (eg wiretapping, use of internal cover agents or computer intrusion) they may ask the police to take action or submit the case to the police, as agreed between the competent investigator and police. If the police deem it necessary, they may always take over the case.
In the Border Guard, the Border Guard headquarters has the same internal law enforcement authority as the Defense Command in the Defense Forces, as well as the regular law enforcement forces of the Border Guard.
When the investigation is ready, the case is taken to the company commander or sergeant major or to his supervisor for consideration. Upon hearing the suspect, his boss releases either the suspect from suspicion or provides appropriate punishment within the range allowed for him. This range
- Company's major sergeant: personal warning, up to three additional task shifts (only for conscription and accidental placement of reserves)
- Company Commander: personal warning, up to five additional task shifts, up to 10 days locked into garrison, public reprimand letter (Finnish: varoitus )
- Battalion Commander, all of the above, and up to fifteen days from confinement to garrison
- The Brigade commander and his boss: all above and up to 30 disciplinary penalties, one disciplinary fine to one fifth of the daily gross daily income, or for conscription, at least daily daily obligations.
During peacetime, professional soldiers (with the exception of certain soldiers assigned to international missions) can not be given disciplinary punishment other than letters of reprimand or public fines.
If the boss does not feel that his power allows him to give enough punishment, he will divert the matter to the next higher boss. When the brigade commander determines that he can not provide sufficient punishment, he will divert this matter to the public prosecutor who will begin prosecution in civil courts. If the officer feels that his punishment is unfair, he can appeal to the brigade commander. The brigade commander's decision may be submitted to the district court within seven days. However, the appeal will not prevent the execution of punishment.
Trials and appeals
Military crimes brought to justice are handled by civilian courts that have members of the military. The district court has an educated civilian judge and two military members. One is an officer and the other a warrant officer, an NCO or a person. The appeals court, acting as the first instance for prosecuting officers with at least the main rank, will have members of the military who have at least the rank of major. The Supreme Court of Finland has two officers with at least a colonel as members when dealing with military crimes. These members are not mentioned for a particular case but are valid for a period of two years. Military members from the district court were elected by an appeals court on the motion of the Finnish Army Commander. Military members of the Court of Appeals are elected by the Department of Justice on the motion of the Ministry of Defense. The military members of the Supreme Court were elected by the President of Finland.
The court sentences for military crimes are presented in civilian jails. Exceptions are established by disciplinary arrests, which can be sentenced to up to 30 days and served in prisoner garrison detention facilities.
When the military holds a permanent or temporary paid position as state military officer (Finland: sotilasvirkamies ), as all officers and NCOs in regular active services do, they will be punished for dismissal (other than punishment if they are convicted of military or civil crimes for more than two years in prison and there is no particular reason for leniency. If the penalty is a life sentence, dismissal is mandatory. The court may also impose a sentence with a shorter prison sentence if the crime indicates that the person is not suitable for state employment.
If military personnel no longer work, the summary disciplinary procedures can not be used and the military no longer has law enforcement power over this issue. In such cases, former members of the service were investigated by the civilian police but the case was handled by the court with members of the military. In punishment, disciplinary penalties can not be used. Conversely if disciplinary punishment, ordinary day sentenced. Typically, this is the case when the reserve is absent from compulsory refresher or conscription exercise is, after the commission of the crime, declared unfit for duty due to medical or security reasons.
Administrative penalty
In addition to the judicial dismissal, the Defense Force and the Border Guard have the option of administratively terminating military service if the person is in a paid position. This can happen even if no criminal charges are pressed. Inside the Defense Forces, professional soldiers can also be suspended administratively for a period of one to six months. Similar to state military officers, those serving in troops deployed on international missions may be administratively dismissed by the Finnish contingent commander. A conscript or reserve army can not be dismissed but their service may be delayed by the brigade commander if they are suspected of committing a crime indicating that they may endanger the safety of others. After this, the person may be declared permanently unfeasible for duty by the regional office of the Armed Forces for safety and security reasons.
As an exception to the principle that military jurisdiction concerns only military people, criminal law regulates military loss. Anyone who is sentenced to prison for at least two years or long jail for a crime of betrayal nature (in particular, crimes in chapters 11 and 12 of the Criminal Code, for example espionage, high treason and related crimes), shall be punished for their military loss too. Thus, not only active military personnel but also retired personnel, reserve troops and people who are too old to become reserve members can lose their military ranks for civilian crimes.
Statistics
Military crime is relatively common in Finland. Partly this is due to the fact that the crime bar has been set consciously low. Crime absent without leave is performed by a soldier who is even a minute late, and little neglect or neglect ignores standing orders or regulations fulfilling an indication of "service crime". Legislators deliberately give military superiors the tools of law to defend discipline by punishing even a few bad behavioral performances if they feel the need. On the other hand, handing out unofficial penalties is not advisable at extremes.
The number of annual military crimes is slightly above 4,000. This absolute majority is dealt with in summary steps, ie by the punishment given by the military superiors. Only about 250 military crimes in one year end up being handled in the district court. The number of calls is very small. In 2014, the appeals court only handles 5 military criminal cases.
German
Members of every branch of the Bundeswehr, the German armed forces, are subject to ordinary civil jurisdiction and unless otherwise stated all civil laws also apply to the army.
The German Constitution allows the federal government in art. 96 II to make military courts in special circumstances: at war, outside Germany or on German ships, acting under justice and only for members of armed forces. In fact, no law is enforced so far. Conversely, suspected crimes committed abroad are subject to the Potsdam district attorney. The reason is the operational headquarters ( EinsatzfÃÆ'¼hrungskommando ) located there.
Nonetheless, there are many acts that only concern soldiers who describe their specific status, their rights and obligations. Military criminal law ( Wehrstrafgesetz ) applies to soldiers by expanding the civil criminal code ( Strafgesetzbuch ) for crimes that can only be committed to military tasks: General offenses (such as defamation, and more) and violations that disrupt the military hierarchies (such as rebellion or harassment).
Law enforcement within each branch is carried out by military police, FeldjÃÆ'¤ger. When investigating, working for a lawyer is equivalent to the German police in a civil matter. In the case of the two groups involved (in the German field), regular and military police work together. In an emergency, regular police are authorized to maintain order until military police arrive.
Soldiers who violate military regulations may also receive punishment in the form of non-judicial punishment or in severe cases court punishment by special courts. This procedure is defined by the military discipline code ( Wehrdisziplinarordnung , WDO). Notice that the WDO explains how to proceed with violations that are not (yet) covered by military criminal law but are clearly contrary to military regulations. The head of the unit as a direct superior acting as the main disciplinary teacher has the exclusive right to vote: non-judicial punishment (such as fines, curfew, arrest up to 7 days), passes the decision to the next superior officer of the unit (Arrest can then be extended to 21 days ) or call a military service court ( Truppendienstgericht ) that has the power to further punishment (such as degradation and shortened salaries by up to five years). Such court judges are civilian, two military officers attending each case and acting as consultants to the judge.
In Germany, there is no federal or military prison. If a soldier is sentenced to up to six months in jail, the sentence is executed by the administration of the soldiers barracks. He will remain in custody for the same time but continue to serve in his unit on duty unless the court has imposed further restrictions. Otherwise, the army will be detained in a civilian state prison. In case a soldier is sentenced to imprisonment for a year or more (6 months or more in a bribery case) he will be dismissed from the armed forces.
India
India has a Law on the Army, the Navy Act, and the Air Force. This law defines legal provisions applicable to uniformed men and women. All three of these Stories are available on searches from official websites. There are certain military powers in India that have laws similar to those that apply to defense services. These include the Border Security Force Act, the Coast Guard Act, the Indo-Tibetan Border Police Act, and the Assam Rifles Act. All Such Stories drew their inspiration from the Army Act.
The military tribunal in India was under extreme pressure with the formation of the Tribunal of the Armed Forces in 2007. There is an increasing voice in the country for reforms on other liberal democratic lines seen in their military justice system.
United Kingdom
The setting up of the British Empire for justice in the armed forces dates back centuries into the Articles of War. By the end of the 19th century it was added to the annual Army Act and manifested in the Naval Discipline Act. The Air Force Act was added in 1918. In 1966, a process of harmonization began with the enactment of the Law of the Twelve Armed Forces. The Armed Forces Act of 2006 supersedes three separate service discipline acts and the previous Armed Forces Act as the legal system under which the Armed Forces operate. In the previous decade the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) had a major impact on the administration of military justice, especially the need for independent court trials. However, the premise underlying the judicial system of service is that discipline is a matter for the commander.
The Armed Forces Act 2006 finalizes the harmonization of service laws, and comes into full effect on 1 November 2009. Guidelines on their application and related matters are provided in the Manual Services Act. One of the driving factors behind changes in legislation incorporating disciplinary action across the armed forces is the tendency of tri-service operations and defense organizations. It deals with military offenses, civil abuses committed in some circumstances, abuses by civilians associated with the armed forces or with armed forces abroad (including family members), the authority of Command Officers to deal with violations quickly, the Martial Court, the Civil Service Courts, custody and appeals. The law also creates the position of Director of the Service Prosecutor.
Summary of transactions by Commanding Officers (CO) is a key feature, this is acceptable in the ECHR because the defendant always has the right to choose a trial by the Martial Court. Most cases are dealt with briefly. Usually CO is a Lieutenant Colonel or equivalent (NATO grade OF-4), but CO may delegate some of the summary strengths associated with subordinates. The superintendent of CO, the Higher Authority, may vary the power of the CO summary agreement. The implication is that everyone subject to service law must have CO, and CO should have a Higher Authority.
The military justice system is headed by a Justice Advocate General who is a civilian and part of the Ministry of Justice.
Administrative procedures allow male or female services to be dismissed due to unsatisfactory behavior in processes similar to those in the private sector. They also allow tops from any rank to provide up to three additional tasks or similar to subordinates for minor infractions. Since its introduction it has significantly reduced the number of cases handled succinctly.
United States
The United States Constitution authorizes the creation of a military justice system. Article I, Section 8 enables the US Congress to "establish regulations for government and regulation of land and sea forces." Congress passed these rules first in 1806 as the Articles of War. Military trials during the American Civil War were ruled by the Lieber Code of 1863. The War articles were replaced in 1951 by the Uniform Uniform of Military Justice (UCMJ).
UCMJ is a federal law, found in Title 10 of the United States Code Chapter 47, and implemented by the Manual for Military Courts, an executive order issued by the President of the United States in his capacity as Supreme Commander of the United States. Armed forces. Courts of belief in the United States can be appealed by a military court appeal to the United States Appeals Court for the Armed Forces (CAAF), a federal appeals court composed of five civilian judges appointed by the President of the United States. The CAAF decision shall be reviewed by the United States Supreme Court.
Violations covered by UCMJ include those covered by "serious crimes and minor offenses" covering officials in general, and including false oaths, abuses of authority, bribery, intimidation, misuse of assets, failure to supervise, neglect of duties, improper conduct and rejection to comply with legitimate orders. It also includes ordinary crimes, but perhaps with different standards of evidence and punishment than civilians, on the grounds that more military personnel are expected by their oath of office. Many of the terms used date back to the era in which the code was written.
See also
- Military trials
- The laws of war
- Military emergency law
References
Further reading
-
Bessner, Daniel; Lorber, Eric (October 2012). "Toward the Theory of Civil-Military Penalties". Armed Forces & amp; Community . 38 (4): 649-668. doi: 10.1177/0095327X12437685. - Madsen, Chris (2008). Military Law and Operations . Aurora, Ontario: Canada Law Book. Free publications are updated 1-2 times per year.
- Schlueter, David A. (2008). Military Justice: Practice and Procedures (7th ed.).
External links
- The Rules of Law in the Armed Conflict Project
Source of the article : Wikipedia
0 Comments