In a court-martial charging a sexual offense under Article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the person identified as the victim is not simply a witness who shows up to testify. Federal law and military regulation establish a structured set of rights and protective measures, and the military justice system has built specific mechanisms to put them into effect. These measures begin early in a case and continue through trial and beyond. Understanding how they are implemented explains why an Article 120 case often looks different from other prosecutions for everyone involved.
The legal foundation: Article 6b
The core of victim protection in the military justice system is Article 6b of the UCMJ, which sets out the rights of a victim of an offense. These include the right to be reasonably protected from the accused, the right to reasonable and timely notice of proceedings, the right not to be excluded from public proceedings, the right to be reasonably heard at certain proceedings, the reasonable right to confer with the government’s counsel, the right to proceedings free from unreasonable delay, and the right to be treated with fairness and respect for the victim’s dignity and privacy. These are not aspirational statements; they are enforceable rights that the system is obligated to implement, and several of the protective measures described below exist precisely to give them effect.
Special Victims’ Counsel
A central mechanism for implementing these rights is the assignment of a Special Victims’ Counsel, known in some services as a Victims’ Legal Counsel. This is a military attorney whose client is the alleged victim, not the government and not the accused. The counsel advises the victim on their rights, advocates for those rights in proceedings, and helps ensure the protections under Article 6b are actually honored. Having independent counsel is significant because it gives the victim a voice in matters that affect them directly, including questions about privacy and about the admission of sensitive evidence, separate from the prosecutor whose duty runs to the government.
No-contact orders and protective orders
A frequent early protective measure is a no-contact order. A commander can issue a military protective order directing the accused to have no contact with the alleged victim, and violating such an order can itself carry consequences. Where appropriate, information about military and civilian protective orders is made available to the victim. These orders implement the statutory right to be reasonably protected from the accused, and they often address not only direct contact but also contact through third parties. Commands may also use administrative tools such as duty reassignments, changes in living arrangements, or expedited transfer requests to reduce contact between the parties while a case proceeds.
Notice and the right not to be excluded
Implementation of the victim’s rights includes a duty to keep the victim informed. The victim is entitled to reasonable, accurate, and timely notice of court-martial proceedings related to the offense. Even when a portion of a proceeding is closed to the public, the victim is still notified of the closure and of the reasons for it. The right not to be excluded from public proceedings means the victim generally cannot be barred from attending, which marks a contrast with the traditional practice of sequestering witnesses.
Protection of privacy through the Military Rules of Evidence
Some of the most consequential protective measures operate through the rules of evidence. Military Rule of Evidence 412, the rape-shield rule, presumptively bars evidence of the alleged victim’s other sexual behavior or sexual predisposition, subject to narrow exceptions, and it requires the party seeking to offer such evidence to file written notice by motion and to litigate admissibility before the evidence can be used. Military Rule of Evidence 513 protects confidential communications between the victim and a psychotherapist, and Military Rule of Evidence 514 protects communications between the victim and a victim advocate. The victim has the right to be reasonably heard on questions arising under Rules 412, 513, and 514, frequently through their Special Victims’ Counsel. These rules are implemented through pretrial motions practice, often resolved in closed sessions so that sensitive material is not exposed unnecessarily.
Closed sessions and courtroom accommodations
To protect privacy, the military judge may close portions of a proceeding to the public, for example when litigating a Rule 412 or Rule 513 issue. Even then, the victim and witnesses are notified of the closure and its reasons, consistent with the notice rights described above. Courtroom logistics can also be arranged to reduce unnecessary contact between the victim and the accused, and the system aims to treat the victim with fairness and respect for dignity and privacy throughout.
How these measures coexist with the accused’s rights
It is important to understand that these protective measures operate alongside, and not in place of, the accused’s constitutional and statutory rights. The accused retains the right to confront and cross-examine witnesses, to present a defense, and to the presumption of innocence. The rape-shield rule, for example, has exceptions designed to protect those rights, and a military judge resolves the tension between victim privacy and the accused’s right to a fair trial on a case-by-case basis. The system’s design reflects an effort to honor both sets of interests rather than to favor one categorically.
Implementation in practice
In a typical Article 120 case, implementation begins when the report is made: the victim is informed of their rights, offered a Special Victims’ Counsel, and provided information about protective orders. A commander may issue a no-contact order and take administrative steps to separate the parties. As the case moves toward an Article 32 preliminary hearing and then trial, the victim receives notice of proceedings, can attend public sessions, and is heard on evidentiary questions affecting their privacy. Throughout, the Special Victims’ Counsel advocates for the victim’s interests within the bounds of the law.
These mechanisms are detailed and fact-dependent, and they continue to evolve through statute and regulation. Anyone with a direct interest in how protective measures apply in a particular Article 120 case, whether a victim seeking to assert their rights or an accused navigating the constraints those rights create, should seek guidance from qualified military legal professionals familiar with the current rules.
Disclaimer
This article is provided strictly for general educational and informational purposes. It is intended to explain how the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), the Rules for Courts-Martial, the Military Rules of Evidence, and related military administrative processes work as a matter of public legal education. It does not constitute legal advice, a legal opinion, or a recommendation about any particular case, and it is not a substitute for advice from a qualified military defense attorney who can evaluate the specific facts and command, service, and jurisdictional circumstances involved.
Reading this article, or contacting any website on which it appears, does not create an attorney-client relationship between the reader and any law firm, attorney, or author. Every court-martial, nonjudicial punishment action, administrative separation, and security-clearance matter turns on its own facts, the charged articles, the convening authority, the service branch, and the evidence, and outcomes vary widely from one case to another.
Military law also changes over time. The Military Justice Act of 2016 (effective January 1, 2019) and subsequent National Defense Authorization Acts renumbered and rewrote many punitive articles, revised the Article 32 preliminary hearing, and altered sentencing, clemency, and appellate procedures. Statutes, regulations, executive orders, the Manual for Courts-Martial, and decisions of the service Courts of Criminal Appeals and the Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces may have been amended, superseded, or reinterpreted after this article was written, and article numbers or procedures cited here may have changed.
For these reasons, no reader should act or decline to act based on this content without first consulting a licensed attorney experienced in military justice about their own situation. The author and publisher make no warranty, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or current applicability of the information provided, and disclaim any liability for any action taken or not taken in reliance on it. If you are facing investigation, charges, or an adverse administrative action, time limits may apply, and you should seek qualified counsel promptly.