| |
Interruption of Punishment by
Unauthorized Absence
Service of all NJP is interrupted during any period
that the service member is unauthorized absence (UA).
A punishment of reduction maybe executed even when
the accused is UA.
COMBINATION OF PUNISHMENTS
Part V, par. 5d, MCM, 1984, provides that all
authorized NJPs maybe imposed in a single case subject
to the following limitations:
l
l
l
l
Arrest in quarters may not be imposed in combi-
nation with restriction.
Confinement on bread and water or diminished
rations may not be imposed in combination with
correctional custody, extra duties, or restriction.
Correctional custody may not be imposed in
combination with restriction or extra duties.
Restriction and extra duties may be combined to
run concurrently, but the combination may not
exceed the maximum imposable for extra duties.
Here are a few examples of acceptable combinat-
ions of punishments:
1. If an 0-4 CO wishes to impose the maximum
amount of all permissible NJP upon an E-3, the maxim-
um that could be imposed would be a:
a. punitive letter of reprimand or admonition
(or an oral reprimand or admonition);
b. reduction to E-2;
c. forfeiture of one-half pay per month for 2
months (based upon the reduced rate); and
d. 45 days’ restriction and extra duties to be
served concurrently.
2. If an O-3 CO (or any OIC, regardless of grade)
wishes to impose the maximum amount of all
permissible NJP upon an E-3, the maximum that could
be imposed would be a:
a. punitive letter of reprimand or admonition
(or an oral reprimand or admonition);
b. reduction to E-2;
c. forfeiture of 7 days’ pay (based upon the
reduced rate); and
d. 14 days’ restriction and extra duties to be
served concurrently.
CLEMENCY AND CORRECTIVE
ACTION ON REVIEW
Clemency action is a reduction in the severity of
punishment that is done at the discretion of the officer
authorized to take such action for reasons thought suf-
ficient to him or her. Remedial corrective action is a
reduction in the severity of punishment or other action
takcn by proper authority to correct some defect in the
NJP proceeding and to offset the adverse impact of the
error on the accused’s right.
AUTHORITY TO ACT
Part V, par. 6a, MCM, 1984, and the JAGMAN,
section 0118, state that after the imposition of NJP the
following officials have authority to take clemency
action or remedial corrective action:
l
l
l
l
l
The officer who initially imposed the NJP (this
authority is inherent in the office, not the person
holding the office)
The successor in command to the officer who
imposed the punishment
The superior authority to whom an appeal from
the punishment would be sent, whether or not
such an appeal has been made
The CO or OIC of a unit, activity, or command
that the accused is properly transferred to after
the imposition of punishment by the first com-
mander
The successor in command of the latter
FORMS OF ACTION
The types of action that can be taken either as
clemency or corrective action consist of setting aside,
remission, mitigation, and suspension.
Setting Aside
This power has the effect of voiding the punishment
and restoring the rights, privileges, and property lost to
the accused by virtue of the punishment imposed. This
action should be reserved for compelling circumstances
where the commander feels a clear injustice has
occurred. This normally means that the commander
believes the punishment of the accused was clearly a
mistake.
If the punishment has been executed, executive
action to set it aside should be taken within a reasonable
time—normally within 4 months of its execution. The
CO who wishes to reinstate an individual reduced in
rate at NJP is not bound by the provisions of the
5-26
|
