UCMJ Article 134 – Wrongful Refusal to Testify

This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes a service member who wrongfully refuses to testify when lawfully required to do so. The integrity of the military justice system depends on witness testimony, and refusal to testify can obstruct investigations, delay justice, and discredit the armed forces. While the right against self-incrimination is protected under Article 31(b) of the UCMJ and the Fifth Amendment, wrongful refusal occurs when a service member declines to testify without a lawful privilege.

Key Elements

The prosecution must prove:

  1. That the accused was lawfully required to testify in a judicial, administrative, or investigative proceeding.
  2. That the accused wrongfully refused to testify.
  3. That the refusal was not protected by privilege (such as the right against self-incrimination).
  4. That, under the circumstances, the conduct was prejudicial to good order and discipline or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.

Scope and Application

This article applies to:

  • Refusal to answer questions as a witness in a court-martial.
  • Refusal to provide testimony in an Article 32 preliminary hearing.
  • Declining to testify in administrative hearings or investigations when no privilege applies.
  • Refusing to cooperate after being granted immunity from prosecution.

It does not punish refusal protected by lawful privileges, such as self-incrimination, attorney-client, chaplain, or spousal privilege.

Punishment

  • Maximum punishment: Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for up to 6 months.

Defenses

Possible defenses include:

  • Privilege: If the refusal was based on the right against self-incrimination or other recognized privileges.
  • Improper order: If the requirement to testify came from someone lacking authority.
  • Ambiguity: If the refusal was not clearly a refusal but rather confusion or misunderstanding.
  • Duress: If the accused reasonably feared harm that justified the refusal.

Examples

If a soldier refuses to testify in a court-martial after being granted immunity, Article 134 applies. If a Marine declines to answer questions at an Article 32 hearing without a lawful privilege, it qualifies. If an airman refuses to cooperate in an inspector general inquiry despite an order, it is punishable. Conversely, if a sailor invokes their right against self-incrimination under Article 31(b), that refusal is lawful and not punishable.

Conclusion

Article 134 wrongful refusal to testify ensures accountability in the military justice system. By requiring testimony except where privileges apply, the UCMJ preserves fairness, discipline, and the search for truth while balancing constitutional protections.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. How is refusal to testify different from exercising the right to remain silent?
Exercising the right to remain silent is a lawful privilege when testimony could incriminate the accused. Wrongful refusal occurs when a person declines to testify despite having no valid privilege. The distinction ensures constitutional rights are protected while still enforcing accountability.

2. Can someone be punished if they refuse after being granted immunity?
Yes. Once immunity removes the risk of self-incrimination, refusal to testify is wrongful. Service members can face confinement and discharge for disobeying. Immunity is specifically designed to secure testimony lawfully.

3. What privileges justify refusal to testify?
Recognized privileges include the right against self-incrimination, attorney-client privilege, spousal privilege, chaplain privilege, and certain official privileges. Refusals based on these grounds are lawful. Anything outside them may be wrongful.

4. What is the maximum punishment?
Dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 6 months. While relatively light compared to major crimes, the consequences can end a career. The punishment reflects the seriousness of obstructing justice.

5. Does Article 134 apply to administrative proceedings?
Yes. Wrongful refusal to testify applies in courts-martial, Article 32 hearings, command investigations, and administrative boards. Any proceeding where testimony is lawfully required can trigger liability.

6. What if the refusal was due to misunderstanding?
If the accused genuinely misunderstood the requirement or believed they were privileged, this may be a defense. The government must prove a willful refusal. Honest mistakes may excuse liability.

7. Can a commander order a service member to testify?
Yes, if the testimony is lawfully required in proceedings. However, commanders cannot override lawful privileges such as the Fifth Amendment. Orders must be lawful and reasonable.

8. How does this offense differ from contempt of court?
Contempt punishes disruptive behavior in court, while wrongful refusal targets disobedience to a requirement to testify. Both ensure respect for proceedings but address different misconduct.

9. Does this article apply if the accused feared retaliation?
Fear of retaliation may explain refusal, but unless it rises to legal duress, it may not excuse liability. Protections such as whistleblower laws exist, but outright refusal without privilege is still punishable.

10. Why does the military criminalize refusal to testify?
Because refusal undermines justice, delays proceedings, and damages confidence in discipline. By punishing wrongful refusal while honoring lawful privileges, the UCMJ maintains balance between rights and accountability.

Sources

  • Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 934, Article 134 (Wrongful Refusal to Testify)
  • Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 edition)
  • Army Regulation 27-10, Military Justice
  • Navy JAGMAN (Judge Advocate General’s Manual) § 0166
  • Air Force Instruction 51-201, Administration of Military Justice
  • Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, United States v. Smith, 27 C.M.R. 3 (1958)
  • Military Attorney Joseph L. Jordan, Articles of the UCMJ web page

This content is for informational purposes only. If you are facing issues related to Article 134 or any other UCMJ provision, you should consult a qualified military attorney.

Related:

  1. UCMJ Article 134 – Disloyal Statements This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who make statements that show disloyalty toward the United States with the intent to promote disaffection or undermine loyalty to the nation. Because the armed forces depend on allegiance, discipline, and...
  2. UCMJ Article 134 – Seizure: Destruction, Removal, or Disposal of Property to Prevent This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who destroy, remove, or otherwise dispose of property in order to prevent it from being lawfully seized. The offense is closely tied to maintaining integrity in investigations, inspections, and lawful authority....
  3. UCMJ Article 134 – Obstructing Justice This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who wrongfully impede, interfere with, or obstruct the due administration of justice. The offense includes actions that delay, prevent, or corrupt investigations, judicial proceedings, or disciplinary processes. Because the military justice...
  4. UCMJ Article 130 – Housebreaking UCMJ Article 130 criminalizes housebreaking, which is the unlawful entry of a building or structure with intent to commit a criminal offense inside. Unlike burglary under Article 129, housebreaking does not require nighttime entry or that the structure be a...
  5. UCMJ Article 134 – Subornation of Perjury This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who persuade, induce, or procure another person to commit perjury. Because the military justice system depends on truthful testimony, attempting to corrupt witnesses undermines fairness, discipline, and the credibility of the...
  6. UCMJ Article 133 – Conduct Unbecoming an Officer and Gentleman UCMJ Article 133 criminalizes conduct by commissioned officers, cadets, or midshipmen that dishonors or disgraces them personally, or seriously compromises their standing as officers. The article is intentionally broad, designed to uphold the integrity and character expected of military leaders....
  7. UCMJ Article 134 – Firearm, Discharging Through Negligence This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who negligently discharge a firearm. The military holds strict standards for the handling of weapons because negligence with firearms endangers lives, undermines discipline, and damages the reputation of the armed forces....
  8. UCMJ Article 123a – Making, Uttering, or Drawing Check, Draft, or Order Without Sufficient Funds UCMJ Article 123a punishes service members who write, make, or pass checks, drafts, or orders for payment while knowing that they do not have enough funds or credit to cover the amount. This offense targets fraudulent financial conduct that undermines...
  9. UCMJ Article 134 – Debt, Dishonorably Failing to Pay This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who dishonorably fail to pay a lawful debt. Financial responsibility is considered part of military discipline because failure to meet obligations harms trust, damages the armed forces’ reputation, and can disrupt...
  10. UCMJ Article 134 – Threat or Hoax Designed or Intended to Cause Panic or Public Fear This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who create or spread false threats, hoaxes, or warnings with the intent to cause panic, fear, or disruption. The military treats these acts as serious misconduct because they undermine discipline, disrupt...
  11. UCMJ Article 134 – Worthless Check Offenses (Dishonorably Failing to Maintain Funds) This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who make, draw, utter, or deliver a check, draft, or order for the payment of money without having sufficient funds or credit and who dishonorably fail to maintain funds to cover...
  12. UCMJ Article 134 – Misprision of a Serious Offense Misprision under Article 134 punishes a service member who knows that a serious offense has been committed but fails to report it and instead conceals it. This misconduct undermines military justice by allowing crimes to go unreported and obstructs the...
  13. UCMJ Article 134 – The General Article UCMJ Article 134, known as the “General Article,” is a catch-all provision that criminalizes a wide range of misconduct not specifically addressed in other articles of the UCMJ. It punishes behavior that is prejudicial to good order and discipline in...
  14. UCMJ Article 127 – Extortion UCMJ Article 127 punishes extortion, which is the wrongful act of obtaining something of value from another by threats. Extortion undermines trust, order, and discipline by allowing one person to use intimidation for personal gain. Because the military environment demands...
  15. UCMJ Article 134 – Jumping from Vessel into the Water Under Article 134, service members can be punished for wrongfully and willfully jumping into the water from a vessel. The offense may seem minor, but unauthorized jumping endangers lives, disrupts operations, and undermines the discipline required aboard military ships. Naval...