Military Justice Handbook published

GMJR's very own Brig. Anthony Paphiti (Rtd) has published the second edition of his Military Justice Handbook. 

The Military Justice Handbook is THE essential text for anyone involved in the Service Justice System. I obtained my copy of the First Edition before my first ever military case and it has been my constant companion ever since. The Handbook serves as a primer for those new to the field and a reference point for seasoned practitioners. The Second Edition’s expanded content means no other book on the subject can match it for breadth and depth. It is simply the leader in the field and should be on the desk of every military law practitioner and commanding officer.

Copies are available here.

Updated GPW Commentary

A summary of the International Committee of the Red Cross's updated commentary on the Third Geneva Convention can be found here. The summary was written by Jemma Arman, Jean-Marie Henckaerts, Heleen Hiemstra, and Kvitoslava Krotiuk. 

Since their publication in the 1950s and 1980s respectively, the Commentaries on the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols of 1977 have become a major reference for the application and interpretation of those treaties. The International Committee of the Red Cross, together with a team of renowned experts, is currently updating these Commentaries in order to document developments and provide up-to-date interpretations of the treaty texts. This article highlights key points of interest covered in the updated Commentary on the Third Geneva Convention. It explains the fundamentals of the Convention: the historical background, the personal scope of application of the Convention and the fundamental protections that apply to all prisoners of war (PoWs). It then looks at the timing under which certain obligations are triggered, those prior to holding PoWs, those triggered by the taking of PoWs and during their captivity, and those at the end of a PoW's captivity. Finally, the article summarizes key substantive protections provided in the Third Convention.

Singapore hazing death prosecution

The Singapore High Court has granted a prosecution appeal in a case involving the hazing ("ragging") death of a member of the Civil Defence Force. Two officers now face more serious charges, according to this report in the Straits Times. "Justice See Kee Oon yesterday ruled that former Tuas View Fire Station rota commander Kenneth Chong Chee Boon, 40, and his deputy Nazhan Mohamed Nazi, 42, were guilty of intentionally aiding servicemen to cause grievous hurt to Corporal Kok Yuen Chin by a rash act that endangered human life."

The case was tried in the civilian courts. The Singapore Civil Defence Act criminalizes such offenses as assault on a subordinate, cruelty, abuse of authority, negligent performance of duty, and conduct or neglect to the prejudice of good order or discipline. Aiding and abetting is an offense.

Brazil is another country that applies military law to firefighters.

This Tuesday: Town Hall 14, The Politics of Military Justice: a Global Study

Please join us for Global Military Justice Reform's Town Hall 14: The Politics of Military Justice: A Global Study, with Professors Andrew Reiter and Brett Kyle (Tues., Apr. 6, 9:00 a.m.). Feel free to pass this along to others who may be interested.

https://us02web.zoom.us/j/85863713314?

pwd=NksraE9TK3hKMkppZXc3aEtweEV0dz09

Meeting ID: 858 6371 3314

Passcode: 077040

One tap mobile

+14086380968,,85863713314#,,,,*077040# US (San Jose)

+16699006833,,85863713314#,,,,*077040# US (San Jose)

Dial by your location

        +1 408 638 0968 US (San Jose)

        +1 669 900 6833 US (San Jose)

        +1 253 215 8782 US (Tacoma)

        +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)

        +1 646 876 9923 US (New York)

        +1 301 715 8592 US (Washington DC)

        +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)

Find your local number: https://us02web.zoom.us/u/kqdOwUPa0

Inter-American Commission statement about Veneuzela's misuse of military courts

 On March 24, 2021, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights issued this press statement:

Given the ruling issued by the Constitutional Chamber of the Supreme Court of Justice (TSJ) of Venezuela that reaffirmed the jurisdiction of the military criminal jurisdiction over military offenses committed by civilians, the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) calls for the State to definitively abandon the trial of civilians by military courts.

The IACHR learned of judgment Nº. 0246 of the Supreme Court of December 14, 2020 which, although it mentioned inter-American standards to annul a decision of the Tenth Military Court of Control of the Criminal Judicial Circuit of the State of Zulia in favor of two civilians, reaffirmed the possibility that the military criminal jurisdiction could learn about military offenses committed by civilians. In the Commission's opinion, this reasoning does not respond to the absolute nature of the prohibition against trying civilians before the military criminal jurisdiction.  

According to information provided by civil society, from January 1, 2014 to date, at least 870 civilians have been presented before the military jurisdiction; of these people, at least 19 remain deprived of liberty. In 2020, the case of the union leader Rubén González stood out, to whom a Court Martial in Caracas confirmed a sentence of five years and nine months of deprivation of liberty imposed by the Fifth Military Court of the Monagas state . In 2018, the surgeon Iván Marulanda was arrested and presented before military courts in Fort Tiuna, remaining deprived of liberty for more than two years. In 2017, the Supreme Court declared that opposition deputy Gilber Caro did not have parliamentary immunity because he was a substitute deputy, authorizing his arrest and trial before the military criminal jurisdiction for treason. Likewise, the Commission is particularly concerned that the use of the military criminal jurisdiction has intensified during the episodes of protests, as occurred in 2017, when more than 750 civilians were brought before this jurisdiction. 

The IACHR reiterates that, in a democratic rule of law, the military criminal jurisdiction must have a restrictive and exceptional scope and be aimed at the protection of special legal interests, linked to the functions that the law assigns to the military forces. Thus, the trial of civilians should be excluded from the scope of military jurisdiction and the military should only be tried for the commission of crimes or misdemeanors that by their very nature violate the legal rights of the military order. Consequently, it is a priority for the State of Venezuela to adopt the necessary measures, including those of a legislative nature, to adapt its internal legislation, as well as to redirect before the ordinary jurisdiction all judicial cases that should not have been heard by the military criminal jurisdiction in the first place. place.