Leaders must be circumspect when it comes to military justice

The Hill, a publication widely read in Washington, D.C., has a useful op-ed by two former military officers on the problems that can arise when senior officials say things that can be viewed as an improper attempt to influence the administration of justice. Referring to a recent unlawful command influence decision of the U.S. Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals, James Joyner and Butch Bracknell note:

This ruling should serve as a clarion call to military justice reformers on Capitol Hill not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. While major reforms in the military justice system may be warranted, including those enacted during the last legislative cycle, the system must carefully toe the line between effective accountability for sexual assault aggressors and a system that is fair, transparent, reliable and law-bound.

Finally, it should also alert executive branch leaders that protecting the constitutional and statutory rights of those who volunteered to serve is a moral imperative similar in quality and magnitude to the duty to protect victims of sexual assault. Military justice reform is necessary and required, but Congress must not let the pendulum swing freely at the expense of the rights of men and women serving our nation in uniform.

The authors caution that "protecting the constitutional and statutory rights of those who volunteered to serve is a moral imperative similar in quality and magnitude to the duty to protect victims of sexual assault. Military justice reform is necessary and required, but Congress must not let the pendulum swing freely at the expense of the rights of men and women serving our nation in uniform."