Yes, it is lawful for a command to direct, or for a military judge to order, a mental health evaluation during active court-martial proceedings, but only for specific, limited purposes. This is governed by Rule for Courts-Martial (RCM) 706. A common reason is to determine the accused’s “competency” to stand trial. If, during the trial, the accused begins to exhibit bizarre behavior that causes the defense counsel or the judge to question whether they can still understand the proceedings and assist in their own defense, the judge can halt the trial and order a competency evaluation.
Another reason is if the defense decides to raise an insanity defense in the middle of the trial. This would trigger the right of the government to have the accused evaluated by their own mental health experts. The purpose of this evaluation is to determine the accused’s “mental responsibility” at the time of the alleged offense. The trial would be delayed pending the completion of this evaluation.
However, a commander cannot direct a mental health evaluation during a trial for an improper purpose, such as to harass the accused or to try and find evidence of their guilt. The evaluation must be for a legitimate, legally recognized purpose related to competency or mental responsibility. The service member’s defense counsel would be heavily involved in this process, ensuring their client’s rights are protected during the evaluation and that the results are properly presented and challenged in court.