What is UCMJ Article 92?
Article 92 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) addresses the failure of military personnel to obey lawful orders or regulations. This includes both direct orders from superior officers and standing regulations that govern military conduct. It is a vital article in ensuring discipline and order within the armed forces.
What types of offenses are covered under Article 92?
Article 92 covers two primary offenses: (1) failing to obey a lawful general order or regulation and (2) dereliction of duty, which includes a failure to perform one’s responsibilities.
What is the difference between “failure to obey an order” and “dereliction of duty”?
Failure to obey an order occurs when a service member intentionally disobeys a lawful order, while dereliction of duty involves neglecting or failing to perform assigned duties, either intentionally or due to negligence.
What is considered a “lawful order” under Article 92?
A lawful order is one that is issued by a superior officer within their scope of authority and is not in conflict with military law, the UCMJ, or regulations. Orders that are illegal, immoral, or unethical do not fall under this article.
Can an order be considered unlawful under Article 92?
Yes, an order is unlawful if it violates established laws, regulations, or ethical standards. A service member is not required to obey an unlawful order, and doing so may lead to a defense in a court-martial.
What is the difference between a “general order” and a “specific order”?
A general order applies to a broad group of individuals and typically includes regulations that govern the overall conduct of military personnel. A specific order is directed at an individual or a small group and pertains to a particular task or action.
What constitutes failure to obey a “general regulation” under Article 92?
Failure to obey a general regulation includes not following rules that are outlined by official military instructions, such as dress codes, conduct during duty hours, or general administrative procedures that apply to all service members.
Can a service member be charged under Article 92 for failing to obey an order that is not in writing?
Yes, a verbal order can be the basis for a charge under Article 92, as long as the order is lawful, specific, and clear. The service member must understand the order, and there must be no reasonable doubt about the intent or nature of the order.
What is “dereliction of duty” under Article 92?
Dereliction of duty occurs when a service member fails to perform their duty due to neglect, or when they knowingly fail to act within the scope of their responsibilities. This offense can involve failure to perform tasks or not following established procedures.
What are the possible penalties for violating Article 92?
Penalties for violating Article 92 can include non-judicial punishment (NJP), reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay, confinement, or a dishonorable discharge, depending on the severity of the offense.
Does failing to follow a “regulation” always result in punishment under Article 92?
Not necessarily. In some cases, if the violation is minor or accidental, the individual may face administrative action rather than formal charges. However, repeated or intentional violations can lead to more severe punishment.
Can a misunderstanding of an order serve as a defense under Article 92?
Yes, if the misunderstanding is reasonable and not due to negligence, it may serve as a valid defense. The defense must demonstrate that the service member did not intentionally disregard the order, and that they acted based on a genuine misunderstanding.
Is there a difference between a written and verbal order in relation to Article 92?
While both written and verbal orders are enforceable under Article 92, written orders provide clearer documentation and evidence. However, verbal orders are still legally binding as long as they are clear and understood by the service member.
Can a service member be charged under Article 92 for failing to follow an order during off-duty hours?
Yes, if the order pertains to duties that apply regardless of duty hours, such as orders related to military readiness, training, or an emergency situation, failure to obey these orders may result in charges under Article 92.
Is there a time limit for charging someone with failure to obey an order under Article 92?
While there is no specific statute of limitations for violations of Article 92, charges must be brought within a reasonable time frame from when the offense occurred. The military justice system aims to maintain discipline and resolve cases promptly.
Can a person be charged with Article 92 for failure to follow a regulation that is outdated or unclear?
If the regulation is outdated or unclear, it may be more difficult to prosecute under Article 92. The prosecution must show that the regulation was still in force at the time of the violation and that it was clear and enforceable.
Can alcohol or substance use excuse failure to obey an order under Article 92?
Alcohol or substance use may not excuse failure to obey an order, but it can be considered in mitigation during sentencing. Intoxication may affect the ability to understand or carry out the order, but it does not automatically negate liability.
Can failure to follow an order during a combat situation result in charges under Article 92?
Yes, even during combat situations, failing to obey lawful orders may result in charges under Article 92. However, mitigating factors such as battlefield conditions or stress may be taken into account during legal proceedings.
Is ignorance of a regulation a valid defense under Article 92?
Ignorance of a regulation is not generally a valid defense. Service members are expected to know and comply with all applicable regulations. However, if the regulation was not properly communicated or updated, it could potentially impact the case.
Can multiple instances of failure to obey orders lead to multiple charges under Article 92?
Yes, if a service member repeatedly fails to obey orders or regulations, they may be charged multiple times under Article 92, with each failure treated as a separate offense.
How does the military prove failure to obey an order under Article 92?
The prosecution must prove that a lawful order was issued, the accused was aware of the order, and they intentionally refused to obey the order. In the case of dereliction of duty, the prosecution must show that the accused failed to perform a required task due to neglect or willful disregard.
What if a service member disagrees with the order or regulation?
A service member must obey lawful orders, even if they disagree with them. If they believe the order is unlawful, they have a duty to report it but must still comply with the order unless it is clearly illegal. Disobeying an order in disagreement could lead to charges under Article 92.
What if a service member fails to obey an order due to illness or injury?
If illness or injury prevents a service member from obeying an order, this could be a valid defense, especially if the service member provides medical documentation. However, failure to report the issue or attempt to follow the order may result in charges.
Can a service member be charged under Article 92 if the order was ambiguous?
If the order was ambiguous or unclear, it may provide a defense under Article 92. The accused must demonstrate that the ambiguity prevented them from understanding the order or carrying it out as required.
Can a service member be charged under Article 92 for failing to follow an order given by an officer outside their direct chain of command?
Yes, if the officer has lawful authority over the service member, such as during joint operations or temporary assignments, failure to obey an order can still lead to charges under Article 92.
Is failure to comply with orders during training exercises punishable under Article 92?
Yes, failing to comply with orders during training exercises can be charged under Article 92, especially if the orders pertain to safety, mission objectives, or other military regulations.
What should a service member do if accused of failing to obey an order or regulation under Article 92?
If accused under Article 92, the service member should invoke their Article 31 rights to avoid making self-incriminating statements, seek legal counsel, and carefully review the details of the order or regulation to determine if it was lawful and clear.
Can failure to obey an order result in a dishonorable discharge?
Yes, depending on the severity of the violation and if the service member has a history of misconduct, failure to obey an order can result in a dishonorable discharge, especially after a court-martial.
What if a service member mistakenly believes an order was unlawful?
If the service member genuinely believes an order was unlawful, they can argue this in their defense. However, the order must be clearly illegal, and the service member must provide evidence that the belief was reasonable at the time.
Can a service member be charged under Article 92 for failing to follow a regulation on personal conduct?
Yes, personal conduct regulations, such as those regarding uniform standards, behavior in public, or other aspects of military life, are enforceable under Article 92. Disobedience of such regulations can lead to charges.
Frequently Asked Questions
- Can failure to obey orders in combat lead to charges under Article 92?
Yes, even in combat situations, failure to obey orders is punishable under Article 92. Combat conditions may mitigate penalties but do not excuse disobedience. - What happens if the regulation violated under Article 92 is outdated or no longer enforced?
If the regulation is outdated, the accused may have a defense, especially if the service member can demonstrate they were unaware of changes to the regulation. - Can a service member be charged under Article 92 for violating an order they received via email or text message?
Yes, as long as the order is lawful, specific, and clear, the medium through which it was delivered does not matter. Email or text orders are enforceable under Article 92. - How does the military distinguish between a legitimate defense and a simple failure to follow orders?
The military will consider factors such as the clarity of the order, the service member’s understanding, intent, and any potential mitigating circumstances like injury or confusion. - What is the maximum punishment under Article 92 for failure to obey an order?
The maximum punishment can include confinement, reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay, and a dishonorable discharge, depending on the severity of the violation and the circumstances surrounding it. - Can a service member be charged with Article 92 for failing to report to duty on time?
Yes, failure to report to duty on time, without a valid excuse, may be charged under Article 92, particularly if it is considered neglect of duty or a deliberate refusal to follow orders. - What is the burden of proof in a violation of Article 92?
The burden of proof lies with the prosecution, who must establish that the service member knowingly and willfully failed to obey a lawful order or regulation. - Can alcohol or drug abuse be used as a defense for failure to obey an order?
Alcohol or drug abuse is not an excuse for failing to obey an order. However, it may be considered in mitigation during sentencing, especially if the abuse impaired the service member’s ability to follow orders. - How can a service member defend themselves against charges under Article 92?
The service member may argue that the order was unclear, that they were unable to comply due to medical or personal reasons, or that the order was unlawful. - Can a violation of Article 92 result in a court-martial?
Yes, severe violations of Article 92, particularly if they are part of a pattern of misconduct, can result in a court-martial, where more serious penalties can be imposed. - Can a service member be charged under Article 92 if they fail to obey an order during off-duty hours?
Yes, if the order pertains to military duties or official responsibilities, failure to obey it during off-duty hours may result in a violation of Article 92. - Can failure to comply with uniform regulations result in charges under Article 92?
Yes, failure to comply with uniform regulations can be charged under Article 92, as they are considered an official regulation that must be followed at all times.