Article 31(b) of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) imposes a mandatory, three-part warning that a military official must provide to a service member before asking any questions if that service member is suspected of committing an offense. This advisement is a cornerstone of military due process and a prerequisite for any lawful interrogation. Failure to properly administer this warning has severe legal consequences for the government’s case.
First, the official must inform the service member of the “general nature of the accusation.” This means they must tell the suspect what crime they are suspected of committing. This notice does not require exhaustive detail, but it must be specific enough for the service member to understand the subject matter of the investigation and make an informed decision about whether to speak.
Second, the questioner must advise the service member that they do not have to make any statement regarding the offense. This is the right to remain silent. It ensures the service member understands they cannot be punished or coerced into providing information that could incriminate them. This part of the warning directly counteracts the inherent pressure to obey orders within the military hierarchy.
Third, the official must warn the service member that any statement they do choose to make may be used as evidence against them in a trial by court-martial. This “warning on use” ensures the suspect is aware of the legal jeopardy they face if they waive their right to silence. These three elements together form the bedrock of protection against compulsory self-incrimination in the armed forces.