Evolving Military Justice (review)

This book is both an appropriate celebration of the fiftieth anniversary of the passage of the Uniform Code of Military Justice in 1952 and a useful update on the state of military law today. It is an anthology of articles, some previously published, some written for this book.

The articles are not all in agreement, reflecting the continuing divide as to how much "civilianization" is desirable in military law. The opening essay by former Senator and Chair of the Armed Services Committee Sam Nunn emphasizes deference by Congress and the judiciary to military personnel policies and courts-martial in the interests of command control and discipline. This sounds a little anachronistic in light of the reforms of military justice resulting from the Military Justice Act of 1968 and the enormous structural and technological changes in the conduct of combat in the last couple of decades. Other articles, however, work over these themes from a variety of viewpoints.

A recurring theme is the need to complete the reforms begun in the Vietnam War era of creating a truly independent judiciary. Co-editor Eugene R. Fidell, a former Coast Guard officer and President of the National Institute of Military Justice, sees the devolution of power from ad hoc courts martial to military judges as one of the most important developments of the past fifty years and calls for "a basic institutional shift in the direction of standing courts-martial and true security in office" of military judges.

Frederick I. Lederer, a law professor and former Army Judge Advocate General (JAG) officer, and Lt. Cdr. Barbara Hundley Zeliff of the Navy JAG Corps pick up on this theme, proposing statutory revisions to guarantee promotion to O-6 and thirty years of service for military judges. Brig. Gen. (ret.) John S. Cooke, former Army Judge Advocate General, also calls for tenure for military judges, judge-only sentencing in noncapital cases, and the abolition of summary courts martial. He rejects at this time proposals for removal of convening authorities' power to personally select court-martial members, although others take a different view.

An interesting essay by law professor Elizabeth Lutes Hillman expresses concern over the introduction in courts martial of "good military character" evidence as to civilian offenses, sometimes resulting in great leniency regarding charges of sexual harassment and misconduct. Other issues regarding the executive branch's ultimate control over military sentences, particularly death penalties, are explored by Dwight H. Sullivan, a Lt. Col. in the Marine Corps Reserve and managing attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.

Differing views are presented in essays arguing for an authoritative administrative-type role for the Manual for Courts Martial (by law professor Gregory E. Maggs); for less civilian judicial deference to military rule-making (by former Coast Guard military trial and appellate judge Captain Kevin J. Barry); for greater use of the Supreme Court's certiorari review power that was granted by Congress in 1984 (by Eugene Fidell); and for the propriety of military commissions after 9/11 (by Marine Corps Chief of Oral History Gary D. Solis).

Finally, recognizing that we may be able to learn something from other countries, there are interesting essays on military justice in the "global perspective," including items from Canada and Australia.

Anyone involved in military law today (and all officers necessarily are) would benefit from this book.