Military Justice

* Re “Military Justice Is Under Fire,” July 6:

The Uniform Code of Military Justice applies to uniformed services personnel on duty, off duty, in uniform, out of uniform, on base, off base, inside the United States and outside the United States. An act committed by a soldier, sailor or marine can damage the reputation of the United States, as well as that of a uniformed service. The code is not merely a means of maintaining discipline on the job, as would a civilian employer’s disciplinary system.

Were military personnel involved in the Tailhook incident on duty?--certainly not in terms of a civilian employer. Was it criminal conduct under the laws of Nevada?--apparently not serious enough for prosecution. But were some of the Tailhook officers involved in conduct unbecoming to an officer? Yes; and although none of them were convicted by court-martial, many of them accepted non-judicial punishment by their commanding officers. Some of them demanded a trial by court-martial. Many careers were ruined. Several leaders who did not participate in the incident at Tailhook were forced into early retirement. And even a secretary of the Navy resigned, related to the mishandling of the aftermath of the incident.

The downing of two American helicopters by American fighter aircraft enforcing the no-fly zone over Iraq was certainly a tragedy. But there was never any evidence of criminal intent. It is a certainty that some careers were ruined. But there was insufficient evidence to convict Capt. Jim Wang, who was charged with “dereliction of duty.” Where under civilian criminal law would you even find such a crime?

The military justice system is not perfect, just as the civilian criminal justice system is not perfect. But it is the system which Congress has enacted into law, and has stood the test of time as a relatively decent criminal justice system, at least since the enactment of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

COL. ALFRED M. DIAZ

U.S. Army Reserve

San Dimas