Understanding the Difference Between Article 86 UCMJ and Article 87 UCMJ: AWOL vs. Missing Movement

The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is a comprehensive legal framework that governs the conduct of U.S. military personnel. Among its various articles, Article 86 UCMJ and Article 87 UCMJ address issues related to absence and movement, but they cover different scenarios. Understanding the distinction between these two articles is crucial for service members to navigate their responsibilities and legal obligations effectively.

What Is Article 86 UCMJ?

Article 86 UCMJ deals with "Absence Without Leave" (AWOL). This article is concerned with service members who are absent from their unit or duty station without proper authorization. Specifically, Article 86 applies when a service member:

· Fails to report to their appointed place of duty at the specified time.

· Leaves their duty station without permission and remains absent for a period of time.

An AWOL charge under Article 86 UCMJ is typically considered a serious offense, reflecting a breach of military discipline and commitment. The severity of the punishment depends on the length of the absence and the circumstances surrounding it. Penalties can range from non-judicial punishment to court-martial, with potential consequences including confinement, reduction in rank, and a dishonorable discharge.

What Is Article 87 UCMJ?

Article 87 UCMJ addresses "Missing Movement," which refers to the failure of a service member to be present for a scheduled movement, such as deploying or embarking on a ship, without proper authorization. This article is concerned with:

· The deliberate or negligent failure to join a unit or participate in a scheduled movement, which can disrupt operations and affect mission readiness.

Missing movement is a specific type of offense that can impact unit cohesion and operational effectiveness. Penalties for violations of Article 87 can also include non-judicial punishment or court-martial, depending on the severity and impact of the offense.

Key Differences Between Article 86 and Article 87 UCMJ

1. Nature of the Offense

Article 86: Focuses on unauthorized absence from a duty station or place of duty. It encompasses any period where a service member is not present at their designated duty location without permission.

Article 87: Specifically deals with missing scheduled movements or assignments. This includes situations where a service member fails to report for a scheduled deployment or other critical movement, which can have operational implications.

2. Impact on Military Operations

Article 86: While AWOL can affect unit operations, its impact is often more related to the individual’s failure to perform their duties and responsibilities.

Article 87: Missing movement has a direct impact on military operations, potentially disrupting planned missions and affecting unit readiness. This offense can have broader implications for the operational effectiveness of the unit.



3. Scope of Absence

Article 86: Addresses any unauthorized absence, regardless of the reason or duration. The focus is on the absence itself and whether it was authorized.

Article 87: Specifically targets the failure to join a scheduled movement. The focus is on the specific event or mission that the service member missed, rather than general unauthorized absence.

Common Defenses for Article 86 and Article 87 Violations

For both Article 86 and Article 87 violations, there are several common defenses that may be utilized:

Article 86: Defenses may include proving that the absence was due to unforeseen circumstances beyond the service member's control, such as a medical emergency or other extenuating circumstances. Demonstrating that the service member attempted to notify their unit or seek permission can also be a valid defense.

Article 87: Defenses may involve showing that the failure to join the movement was due to legitimate reasons such as misinformation, lack of proper orders, or a miscommunication. Proving that the service member was not properly notified or that there were valid reasons for their absence can be essential in defending against this charge.

Understanding the distinctions between Article 86 UCMJ (AWOL) and Article 87 UCMJ (Missing Movement) is essential for service members to ensure compliance with military regulations and avoid serious legal repercussions. While both articles address issues related to absence, they apply to different scenarios with distinct implications for military operations and discipline. By recognizing the specific nature of each offense, service members can better navigate their responsibilities and seek appropriate legal counsel if facing charges under these articles.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Understanding Article 134 UCMJ: Offenses and Defenses

Image
As a member of the United States Armed Forces, you are held to a high standard of conduct both on and off duty. The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) sets forth the rules and regulations governing the behavior of service members, and violation of these rules can lead to serious consequences. One of the most widely used articles in the UCMJ is Article 134, which covers a range of offenses that do not fall under any other specific article. In this blog post, we will explore the offenses covered by Article 134 and the potential defenses available to service members facing charges under this article. Article 134 UCMJ covers three types of offenses: those that are prejudicial to good order and discipline, those that bring discredit upon the armed forces, and those that are of a nature to bring dishonor upon the armed forces. Examples of offenses that fall under these categories include: 1. Conduct unbecoming an officer or enlisted member 2. Adultery 3. Fraternization 4. Drunk or reck...
Read more

Understanding UCMJ Articles: A Comprehensive Guide to Military Justice

Image
The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) is the cornerstone of military law in the United States, ensuring discipline, order, and justice among members of the armed forces. For anyone connected to the military—whether service members, legal professionals, or family members—understanding UCMJ articles is essential. These articles outline the rules, offenses, and procedures governing military personnel, providing a framework for accountability and fairness. In this blog, we’ll explore the significance of UCMJ articles, highlight key provisions, and explain how they impact military justice. What Are UCMJ Articles?  The UCMJ, enacted in 1950, is a federal law that applies to all branches of the U.S. military, including the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and Space Force. The code is divided into articles, each addressing specific aspects of military law. These articles provide clear guidelines for acceptable behavior, define criminal offenses, and establish procedu...
Read more

UCMJ Mutiny and Sedition: Defining the Charges and Their Legal Implications

Image
In the military justice system, maintaining discipline and order is paramount. Among the most severe charges that can be levied against service members are mutiny and sedition. Under the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), these offenses are treated with the utmost seriousness due to their potential to disrupt the chain of command and compromise military effectiveness. Understanding what constitutes mutiny and sedition, along with their legal implications, is crucial for service members to safeguard their rights and navigate the complexities of military law. Defining UCMJ Mutiny and Sedition Mutiny  and sedition  are specific offenses under the UCMJ that relate to actions undermining military authority and cohesion. Mutiny  (Article 94 UCMJ): Mutiny involves the act of rebellion against lawful authority or orders. Specifically, it refers to the willful refusal to follow lawful orders, or an attempt to overthrow or resist lawful authority, whether through force or int...
Read more