War Crime Pardons and Presidential (Self-) Restraint

In 2019, then-President Trump pardoned three military officers for battlefield misconduct that could have been charged as war crimes. These were the first such pardons in American history and left many current and former members of the Armed Forces bewildered: these officers had all been charged by their military chains-of-command after sufficient evidence indicated culpability, and in two of the cases, military juries (“panels”) consisting of high-ranking officials with combat experience had convicted the officers and sentenced them to hefty federal prison terms. The granting of clemency under these circumstances has proven fraught with consequences – consequences adversely affecting the relationship between the president as commander-in-chief and the senior military leaders who cautioned against such extrajudicial mercy. Nevertheless, the president’s authority to do so, under Article II of the Constitution, is nearly without limit, and no other statute, case law precedent, or other formal restriction prevents him from doing so. This article approaches the problem from an assumption that neither the Constitution itself will be amended to carve out such crimes from the president’s reach, nor that Congress will amend the Uniform Code of Military Justice or the War Crimes Statute to chip away at this power by enacting administrative conditions on its exercise. Rather, this article suggests that the most likely and practical tool to prevent such pardons in the future is the reasonable, prudential exercise of restraint by the commander-in-chief. Several contingent factors, based on the possible timing of the pardon in relation to where the case is in the military justice process, are identified as a framework for exercising this prudential restraint notwithstanding the Constitutional authority to ignore it.

Military Systems of Justice

Sociologists have largely ignored the study of military tribunals and justice systems. We offer a descriptive overview of military systems of justice intended for use by political and military sociologists, focusing on the case of the United States armed services. We contextualize the principal military systems of justice and provide extended discussions of how the American case connects through formal and informal channels to international legal structures. American military law and justice link three key legal realms: international law on conflict and security at the global level; the so called National Security Constitution at the national level; and the Uniform Code of Military Justice at the institutional level.

Rethinking Mutiny

This chapter begins with defining mutiny and exploring its origins. It considers the nature of military relationships across time before focusing upon the British Army Act (1955) and the American Uniform Code of Military Justice. The issues of mutiny as a collective act, and the active or passive role of those involved in mutinies, are used to illustrate the intricacies of the legal framework which then flows into using cases of mutiny on slave ships to highlight the importance of the historical context. The nature of sovereign power is then used to illustrate both the coercive control over military subordinates and the fragility of that very same coercion. This leads into the way the act of mutiny is socially constructed—in other words, what counts as ‘mutiny’ is a subjective not an objective construction. The chapter concludes with two sections, the first of which lists the ‘Refrains of Mutiny’: the patterns that recur across space and time, from the social construction of mutiny to the importance of establishing who the enemy is, the role of antecedence, the default response of the authorities, the importance of scapegoating, the omnipresence of the phenomena, the role of the heroic leader, the impact of serendipity, the relational nature of leadership, and finally the role of enthralment. The final section focuses on various explanations of mutiny, using material drawn from political revolutions and industrial relations to highlight the similarities and differences between these and mutinies, and relates such disputes to the difference between agonism and antagonism.

Restoring the Power of the Convening Authority to Adjust Sentences

In 2013, Congress abrogated the power of certain military officers to reduce court-martial sentences, thereby eliminating a military defendant’s best hope for efficient and effective relief from common legal errors in the military justice system. While the overhaul of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) in 2016 promised significant reform, it ultimately failed to substantially reduce common legal errors. This Note analyzes how the 2013 and 2016 reforms have combined to prevent military defendants from receiving timely and adequate relief. In light of this analysis, this Note suggests an amendment to the UCMJ that would restore to certain officers a limited authority to reduce sentences based on legal errors. Such a reform ultimately addresses the core concerns that led to the 2013 revision while simultaneously providing an efficient and effective remedy for common legal errors, furthering the UCMJ’s aim of promoting justice and maintaining good order and discipline.

Research on Sea Area Data Management Based on a Uniform Code Assignment Method

Based on a data management method that utilizes unified coding and allocation numbers, this paper proposes an online, direct reporting, full-process management method, from ownership information generation to allocation number printing. In the unified coding and allocation, our method includes mainly top-level nodes (national nodes), secondary nodes (provincial and municipal nodes), and base-level nodes (county-level nodes) of multiple hierarchical structures with upper and lower affiliation. Data audit and registration approval authority is implemented through different levels of branch nodes, which focuses on the development and optimization of coding and allocation methods. It also uses the national sea area dynamic monitoring and management system (NSADMMS) as a platform to achieve the application of coding and allocation methods. After 4 years of operation, the practicality of the research content is verified. At the same time, the sea space resource utilization data managed by this method show that there is a larger fluctuation of the sea area type in the industry, and open sea use is dominant in the sea use area.

Institutionalizing accrual budgeting and accounting through a uniform legislation: Une expérience á la Camerounaise

This paper traces the use of accrual accounting in a tradition where a uniform code-based accounting chart is imposed on all levels of government. Operating within a hybrid of Franco-German and Anglo-Saxon accounting heritage, local government in Cameroon experienced some hurdles in practicing accrual accounting for over a decade. It becomes therefore pertinent to examine the motivation towards the move to accrual accounting and the extent to which accrual data is used for financial reporting and decision-making. The study is hinged on a triangulation in qualitative research, with a case study, interviews and documentary analysis. New Public Management and the institutional theories are used as a framework to broaden the understanding of the practice of accrual as an accounting choice underpinning reforms in the Cameroon public sector. It was revealed in this study that the normative and coercive isomorphic pressures influenced the adoption and practice of accruals in councils. In order to appear legitimate and for fear of being sanctioned, council authorities had to produce some accrual-based financial reports at all cost, even though these reports were hardly used for management decisions making.