Military Justice Reform Legislation and Related Materials
Located here are documents relevant to the ongoing discussion about military justice structural changes and other reforms. But first a word from former Judge Quinn of the then Court of Military Appeals.
"Criticism can be helpful or vituperative. The Uniform Code and the United States Court of Military Appeals have been subjected to both types. So far as the Code is concerned, Congress is the constitutional arbiter of its usefulness and effectiveness in governing the men and women in the armed forces. Individual members of Congress may be sensitive to criticism of any kind, but, as a body, Congress is not normally induced to enact legislation by private platitudes or personal preferences. It is not surprising, therefore, that it gave no serious attention, a few years after the Uniform Code had been in operation, to the nostalgic plea by Admiral Ira N. Nunn, The Judge Advocate General of the Navy, that Congress return to the Navy the paternalistic system of military justice that obtained under the Articles for the Government of the Navy. It similarly disregarded the bald representation of The Judge Advocate General of the Air Force that “military justice was administered more efficiently” under the old Elston Act than under the Uniform Code." Congress has, however, over the years, been readily responsive to demonstrated deficiencies in the Uniform Code." Robert E. Quinn, The Role of Criticism in the Development of Law. 35 MIL. L. REV. 47, 50 (1967). -------------- ***The National Institute of Military Justice, in cooperation with CAAFlog and Global Military Justice Reform, today released the Military Justice Reform Sourcebook for Legislators and Journalists (June 2021). -------------- Legislation.
The “Military Justice Improvement and Increasing Prevention Act of 2021." (Introduced in the Senate on 29 April 2021.)
"I am Vanessa Guillen Act." (introduced September 2020.) (Reintroduced 13 May 2021 by US Sen. Mazie K. Hirono (D-HI) — along with Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ), Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE), Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-VT, Sen. Tammy Baldwin (D-WI), Sen. Ben Ray Lujan (D-NM) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY).)
One similarity with the MJI&IPA is that it "Shift[s] prosecutorial decisions for sexual harassment and sexual assault cases outside the chain of command to an Office of the Chief Prosecutor established within each military service."
Here is a link to Department of Defense budget posture in review of the Defense Authorization Request for Fiscal Year 202210 June 2020, in which Secretary Austin and General Milley testified. (Goto 1:10:00 on the video for relevant testimony.)
The Defense Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces Report on Investigative Case File Reviews for Military Adult Penetrative Sexual Offense Cases Closed in Fiscal Year 2017 on October 19, 2020.
The Defense Advisory Committee on Investigation, Prosecution, and Defense of Sexual Assault in the Armed Forces has released itsReport on Racial and Ethnic Data Relating to Disparities in the Investigation, Prosecution, and Conviction of Sexual Offenses in the Military on December 15, 2020.