Business as usual in Uganda

Despite a clear contrary ruling by the country's Supreme Court, Uganda continues to prosecute civilians by court-martial. Here is the Peoples' Defence Forces press release on the latest such cases.

New military court proposed for Fiji

The Fiji Times reports here about a Constitution Review Commission proposal that would create a military court that would be equivalent to the High Court and make other important changes in Fiji's military justice system.

Significantly, cases before the proposed Military Court would be heard by sitting High Court judges assigned on an ad hoc basis, rather than judges operating within the military command structure.

The Commission said this was intended to maintain the court’s independence from the military and ensure that constitutional protections under the Bill of Rights also apply to military personnel facing prosecution.

It has also recommended that Military Court hearings be open to the public under the same standards applying to civilian courts.

Duty to disobey unlawful orders -- a case from South Korea

What to do when an order is unlawful? A recent decision from South Korea addresses this timely question:

The court stated, “Colonel Yu was clearly aware that the superior’s order was illegal, and it appears he only brought a minimal number of personnel for a formal deployment,” adding, “It is not reasonable to evaluate that he followed an illegal order merely based on the fact that he deployed.” The court further stated, “Passive resistance is also a way to confront illegal orders.” The court added, “Realistically, it is difficult to expect all soldiers to risk danger and firmly refuse orders,” and “They can choose not to properly cooperate by delaying or scaling down the execution of orders.”

Steve Vladeck on "Reining in Military Jurisdiction"

On Prof. Steve Vladeck's One First Supreme Court blog, an overview of issues around the scope of military court jurisdiction can be found here.

Did they know, and does it matter? : US Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces to decide on permissive inference of a positive marijuana drug test

 

The Marijuana Herald reported that the United States Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces is set to hear the review of an Air Force member to determine whether a positive marijuana drug test of a service member is sufficient to prove that the member knowingly consumed marijuana.

The two questions of law to be considered by the court are as follows:

I. Whether the permissive inference is unconstitutional for marijuana cases, both facially and as applied to this case. 

II. Whether Appellant's conviction for marijuana use is legally insufficient.

Read more here.