Court-martial
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Court Martial" redirects here. For other uses, see Court Martial (disambiguation).
 | This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2007) |
Most militaries maintain a court-martial system to try cases in which a breach of military discipline may have occurred. Some countries, however, have no court-martial in time of peace; this is the case in France and Germany, for example, where ordinary, civilian courts are used instead.[1]
In addition, courts-martial may be used to try prisoners of war for war crimes. The Geneva Convention requires that POWs who are on trial for war crimes be subject to the same procedures as would be the holding army's own soldiers.
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.
Contents[show] |
[edit] Composition
Usually, a court-martial takes the form of a trial with a presiding judge, a prosecutor and defensive counsel (all trained lawyers as well as officers) and (in some cases) a panel of officers (and sometimes enlisted personnel) acting as jury. The precise format varies from one country to another and may also depend on the severity of the accusation. E.g. The US military makes the distinction between a general court-martial, which requires a panel of at least five members for severe crimes, a special court-martial (at least three panel members) for lighter offenses and a summary court-martial with only one panel member and no judge for minor infractions[2]. | This section requires expansion. |
[edit] Jurisdiction
Courts martial have the authority to try a wide range of military offences, many of which closely resemble civilian crimes like fraud, theft or perjury. Others, like cowardice, desertion, and insubordination, are purely military crimes. Punishments for military offences range from fines and imprisonment to execution (in nations that retain the death penalty). Military offences are defined in the Army Act, Royal Air Force Act and Royal Navy Act for members of the British Military. Regulations for the Canadian Forces are found in the Queen's Regulations and Orders. For members of the United States armed forces offenses are covered under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ). These offences, their corresponding punishments and instructions on how to conduct a court-martial, are explained in detail based on each country and/or service.[edit] By country
[edit] Canada
In Canada, there is a two-tier military trial system. Summary trials are presided over by superior officers, while more significant matters are heard by courts martial, which are presided over by independent military judges serving under the independent Office of the Chief Military Judge. Appeals are heard by the Court Martial Appeal Court of Canada. Capital punishment in Canada was abolished generally in 1976, and for military offences in 1998. Harold Pringle was the last Canadian soldier executed, in 1945, for a military offence.[3][edit] India
There are four kinds of court-martial in India. These are the General Court Martial (GCM), District Court Martial (DCM), Summary General Court Martial (SGCM) and Summary Court Martial (SCM). According to the Army Act, army courts can try personnel for all kinds of offences except for murder and rape of a civilian, which are primarily tried by a civilian court of law.[edit] United Kingdom
The Court Martial is one of the Military Courts of the United Kingdom. The Armed Forces Act 2006 establishes the Court Martial as a permanent standing court. Previously courts-martial were convened on an ad hoc basis. The Court Martial may try any offence against service law.[4] The Court is made up of a Judge Advocate, and between three and seven (depending on the seriousness of the offence) officers and warrant officers.[5] Rulings on matters of law are made by the Judge Advocate alone, whilst decisions on the facts are made by a majority of the members of the court, not including the Judge Advocate, and decisions on sentence by a majority of the court, this time including the Judge Advocate.[6][edit] United States
Most commonly, courts-martial in the United States are convened to try members of the U.S. military for violations of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (or UCMJ), which is the U.S. military's criminal code. However, they can also be convened for other purposes, including military tribunals and the enforcement of martial law in an occupied territory. Courts-martial are governed by the rules of procedure and evidence laid out in the Manual for Courts-Martial, which contains the Rules for Courts-Martial, Military Rules of Evidence, and other guidance.[edit] See also
[edit] References
- ^ Note about the military justice, French Senat
- ^ http://www.military.com/benefits/legal-matters/courts-martial
- ^ Clark, Andrew (2008-07-14). "A KEEN SOLDIER: THE EXECUTION OF SECOND WORLD WAR PRIVATE HAROLD PRINGLE". National Defence and the Canadian Forces. http://www.journal.forces.gc.ca/vo4/no2/book-livre-04-eng.asp. Retrieved 2010-08-08.
- ^ Section 50
- ^ Sections 154 to 157
- ^ Sections 159 to 160
[edit] Further reading
- Macomb, Alexander, Major General of the United States Army, The Practice of Courts Martial, (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1841) 154 pages.
- Macomb, Alexander, A Treatise on Martial Law, and Courts-Martial as Practiced in the United States. (Charleston: J. Hoff, 1809), republished (New York: Lawbook Exchange, June 2007), ISBN 1584777095, ISBN 978-1584777090, 340 pages.
