ROK JA fights city hall -- and wins

SBS News has this interesting tale of a South Korean judge advocate whose promotion was unfairly withheld. Excerpt:

A military judge advocate whose promotion was put on hold under the allegation of involvement in drafting the so-called Ministry of National Defense "suspicious document" surrounding the death of the late Corporal Chae Su-geun has won an appeal lawsuit.

The Seoul Administrative Court's Administrative Division 10 (Presiding Judge Jung Eun-young) recently ruled in favor of the plaintiff in a lawsuit filed by military judge advocate A against the Minister of National Defense, seeking to cancel the withholding of his promotion appointment.

* * *

A filed an administrative lawsuit, arguing, "Because the Minister of National Defense requested disciplinary deliberation for unjust purposes at the demand of lawmakers, the promotion withholding decision based on this is illegal."

The court sided with A, ruling that the Ministry's measure was illegal both procedurally and substantively.

The tribunal pointed out, "Before taking the measure, the defendant did not notify the plaintiff of the facts causing the measure, the details of the measure, and the legal basis, nor did the defendant provide an opportunity to submit opinions," adding, "It restricted the party's rights and interests without going through prior notification or opinion-hearing procedures."

It also noted that A's actions did not constitute grounds for major disciplinary action.

The tribunal judged, "The grounds for requesting disciplinary deliberation merely state that A agreed to use the material he drafted as an external briefing document, and that content alone is not enough to conclusively determine that the degree of wrongdoing was severe and intentional."

New legislation in Algeria

El Moudjahid reports:

Military Justice Code:

The Foundations of the Rule of Law Consolidated

The adoption on Thursday of the law establishing the Military Justice Code is part of a comprehensive revision designed to support the momentum of changes introduced by the 2020 Constitution, within the framework of reforms initiated by the President of the Republic, Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces, and Minister of National Defence, Abdelmadjid Tebboune.

Presenting the text to the members of the National People's Assembly (APN), the Minister of Justice explained that it aims to strengthen the foundations of the rule of law and address certain practical shortcomings revealed by military judicial activity in the field, while preserving the gains achieved, particularly following the 2018 revision and the adoption of the principles of a fair trial, two levels of jurisdiction, and the widespread use of information and communication technologies in military justice.

The new code defines military justice as a specialized criminal justice system, administered by military courts under the supervision of the Supreme Court, in accordance with the principles of legality, a fair trial, and respect for human dignity and rights. It organizes military jurisdictions into military courts of first instance and military courts of appeal at the level of each military region, elevates to the rank of court president, at least, the magistrate seconded from the Ministry of Justice to preside over the military court of appeal, and addresses the practical difficulties related to replacing military magistrates to complete the composition of the criminal court. The text also creates the positions of First Deputy Military Prosecutor General and First Deputy Military Prosecutor of the Republic, granting the Military Prosecutor General hierarchical authority over all personnel under the Ministry of National Defense operating within the structures of the military justice system.

Speaking of trying civilians in military courts . . .

. . .  Consider this report about secret military trials and executions in eastern Libya. Excerpt:

Amnesty said military courts in eastern Libya had repeatedly violated defendants' rights to a fair trial, including access to lawyers, sufficient time to prepare a defence, the right to remain silent and the right to a public hearing before an independent and impartial court.

The organisation added that military prosecutors and judges in the east are not independent because they are affiliated with the LAAF or allied armed groups.

In 2017, Libya’s eastern-based House of Representatives passed a law giving military courts jurisdiction over civilians accused of terrorism and crimes committed in “military areas”. The law was later declared unconstitutional by Libya’s Constitutional Chamber. 

Executions have resumed as UN-led efforts to unify Libya’s rival institutions and prepare the country for national elections continue.

Amnesty said the eastern authorities should halt all executions and conduct independent and impartial investigations into allegations of torture and other ill-treatment.

The executions come as the country remains split between rival administrations, with the internationally recognised Government of National Unity controlling the west and an administration allied with Haftar’s forces controlling the east and much of the south.

The country's courts have been engaging in a prolonged tug of war, as this report indicates. 

Afghanistan Supreme Court denies civilians are being tried in military courts

The court responded to charges in a recent UNAMA report. Details here. Excerpt:

Last week, UNAMA, in a 28-page report, expressed concern over what it described as continuing gaps in transparency and accountability within the security institutions.

In the report, UNAMA also raised concerns about the jurisdiction of military courts to try civilians, stressing that under international human rights standards, civilians should ordinarily be tried before independent civilian courts.

Khalil Ahmad Nadem, a legal expert, said: “This should also be observed in Afghanistan because if civilians are tried in military courts, justice may not be ensured.”

Fazl Rahman Orya, a political analyst, said: “Military courts are established to try military personnel. That is what distinguishes them from ordinary courts. For this reason, I do not think civilians have been tried in such courts.”

The UNAMA report can be found here. 

Tragic plane crash in DRC

Two senior military justice officials, incuding the auditor general, were among the victims of a plane crash in the DRC. Details here.