UCMJ Article 98 – Noncompliance with Procedural Rules

UCMJ Article 98 punishes officials who knowingly or willfully fail to comply with procedural rules in the administration of military justice. It applies to commanders, military judges, convening authorities, trial counsel, and others responsible for courts-martial proceedings. The article is designed to safeguard fairness in the military justice system by holding accountable those who manage it.

Article 98 is rarely charged on its own, but its presence reinforces the importance of procedural compliance. Military justice is built on discipline, but also on due process. If those entrusted with the system disregard required procedures, the legitimacy of convictions and punishments is undermined.

Key Elements

To convict under Article 98, the prosecution must prove:

  1. That the accused had a responsibility under the UCMJ or Manual for Courts-Martial to follow certain procedural rules.
  2. That the accused knew the rule or requirement.
  3. That the accused willfully or knowingly failed to comply.

The violation must be more than a mistake or oversight. It requires proof of deliberate disregard for procedure.

Scope and Application

Article 98 applies to various roles within the military justice system. Examples include:

  • A convening authority deliberately failing to ensure proper referral of charges.
  • A military judge knowingly ignoring required procedures during a trial.
  • A commander willfully refusing to follow mandated steps in preferral or disposition of charges.

Negligent mistakes may lead to administrative correction, but criminal liability under Article 98 arises only when failure to comply is intentional.

Punishment

The maximum punishment authorized under Article 98 is dismissal, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and confinement for 1 year. While the penalties are lower compared to violent crimes, they reflect the seriousness of undermining the fairness of military justice.

Defenses

Common defenses include:

  • Lack of knowledge: The accused did not know of the specific procedural requirement.
  • Good faith mistake: The failure was an error, not deliberate disregard.
  • No authority: The accused did not have responsibility for the procedure in question.
  • Substantial compliance: If the accused substantially followed the rule and no prejudice occurred, criminal liability may not attach.

Examples

If a military judge knowingly refuses to allow a required Article 39(a) session, Article 98 may apply. If a convening authority deliberately bypasses required review of charges, it could constitute noncompliance. If trial counsel knowingly withholds required procedural steps in order to expedite a case, that too may be punishable.

Conclusion

Article 98 ensures that those responsible for military justice uphold the very procedures that guarantee fairness. By punishing willful noncompliance, the article protects service members from arbitrary or unfair trials. It reinforces both accountability and trust in the military justice system.

Frequently Asked Questions

1. Who can be charged under Article 98?
Any official responsible for military justice procedures, such as convening authorities, judges, counsel, or commanders, if they knowingly fail to comply with required rules.

2. What makes noncompliance criminal?
The violation must be willful or knowing. Simple mistakes or negligence are not enough for liability under Article 98.

3. What is the maximum punishment?
Confinement for 1 year, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and dismissal. The punishment reflects the seriousness of undermining justice, though it is less severe than violent offenses.

4. How is Article 98 different from other UCMJ provisions?
Most UCMJ articles punish misconduct by ordinary service members. Article 98 is unique because it punishes misconduct by those administering justice.

5. Can commanders be charged for failing to follow preferral rules?
Yes, if the failure is willful and they had a duty to comply. Commanders who knowingly skip required steps can be liable.

6. Does negligence qualify under Article 98?
No. It must be a willful or knowing failure. Negligent errors are usually corrected administratively, not criminally.

7. Why is Article 98 rarely used?
Because most failures of procedure are addressed through appellate review rather than criminal charges. Still, the article exists to punish deliberate abuses.

8. Can defense counsel be charged under Article 98?
Yes, if they knowingly disregard required procedures. However, defense errors are typically addressed through appeals, not criminal liability.

9. How does Article 98 protect service members?
By deterring officials from ignoring procedures, it ensures service members receive fair trials and lawful due process.

10. Why is Article 98 important if rarely enforced?
Because its existence enforces accountability at the highest levels of the justice system. It signals that no one is above the rules that protect fairness.

Sources

  • Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 898, Article 98
  • Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 edition)
  • Army Regulation 27-10, Military Justice
  • Navy JAGMAN (Judge Advocate General’s Manual) § 0125
  • Air Force Instruction 51-201, Administration of Military Justice
  • Court of Appeals for the Armed Forces, United States v. Hamilton, 41 M.J. 22 (1994)
  • 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 98 or any other UCMJ provision, you should consult a qualified military attorney.

Related:

  1. UCMJ Article 82 – Solicitation UCMJ Article 82 defines the offense of solicitation. It punishes a service member who wrongfully solicits or advises another to commit a UCMJ offense, provided the solicitation was made with the intent that the offense actually be committed. The solicitation...
  2. UCMJ Article 96 – Releasing a Prisoner Without Authority UCMJ Article 96 punishes any service member who, without proper authority, releases or allows the escape of a prisoner in their custody. This provision exists to protect the integrity of military detention and confinement systems. Whether a prisoner is awaiting...
  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 134 – False Swearing False swearing under Article 134 occurs when a service member makes a false statement under oath that is not material to a judicial proceeding. Unlike perjury under Article 131, false swearing does not require the statement to be material or...
  5. UCMJ Article 134 – Public Record: Altering, Concealing, Removing, Mutilating, Obliterating, or Destroying This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who wrongfully alter, conceal, remove, mutilate, obliterate, or destroy a public record. Public records include any official document, paper, file, or electronic record maintained by military or government authority. Because the...
  6. UCMJ Article 129 – Burglary UCMJ Article 129 criminalizes burglary, which is unlawfully breaking and entering the dwelling house of another in the nighttime with the intent to commit a criminal offense inside. Burglary is considered more serious than unlawful entry because it combines trespass...
  7. UCMJ Article 134 – Quarantine: Medical Breaking This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who wrongfully break, disregard, or violate a medical quarantine order. Quarantines may be imposed to control the spread of infectious diseases, protect military readiness, and safeguard both the force and surrounding...
  8. UCMJ Article 134 – Violation of Parole This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes service members who, after being granted parole from confinement, violate the conditions of their release. Parole is a privilege that allows an individual to serve part of a sentence under supervision outside confinement....
  9. 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...
  10. UCMJ Article 119 – Manslaughter UCMJ Article 119 punishes the unlawful killing of another human being without the aggravating factors that make the crime murder under Article 118. Manslaughter recognizes that some killings occur without premeditation or intent to commit murder, but they are still...
  11. UCMJ Article 134 – Sentinel or Lookout: Offenses Against or By This enumerated offense under Article 134 punishes misconduct either committed against a sentinel or lookout on duty, or misconduct by a sentinel or lookout who fails to properly perform their duties. Sentinels and lookouts hold critical positions in military security,...
  12. UCMJ Article 131 – Perjury UCMJ Article 131 criminalizes perjury, which is willfully giving false testimony under a lawful oath in a judicial proceeding or official matter. Because the military justice system depends on honesty and integrity, lying under oath is treated as one of...
  13. 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...
  14. UCMJ Article 117 – Provoking Speeches or Gestures UCMJ Article 117 makes it an offense for a service member to use provoking or reproachful words or gestures toward another person subject to the UCMJ. The purpose of this article is to prevent fights, maintain discipline, and preserve harmony...
  15. UCMJ Article 80 – Attempts UCMJ Article 80 establishes liability for attempts to commit offenses under the Uniform Code of Military Justice. It punishes service members who, with the specific intent to commit an offense, take a substantial step toward its commission, even if the...