Chapter 1 Introduction Disciplinary Systems The service academies are one of the main sources of newly commissioned officers. Over the last 20 years, the academies have provided about 10 percent of annual new officer accessions, with the bulk of the remainder coming from the Reserve Officers Training Corps and officer candidate schools. Each of the academies operates adjudicatory systems to provide students Although each institution's processes are somewhat unique, students accused of honor or conduct violations at the various academies experience generally similar investigative and separation procedures. The honor and conduct adjudicatory systems at each academy are considered by the academies to be administrative systems. That is, they are intended primarily as an aid in maintaining discipline and order. As such, they are nonjudicial in character. The U.S. Constitution, through the President, gives a commanding officer executive authority (the right to lead). The Congress, through the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), provides commanders with quasi-judicial responsibility when they act in an administrative (nonjudicial) punishment capacity, and judicial authority when they act as a court-martial convening authority. Academy students are expected to adhere to civilian laws, UCMJ, and service and academy directives and standards. Unless excluded by statute, all statutory provisions applicable to military members are also applicable to cadets. Article 2 of the UCMJ2 specifically cites "cadets, aviation cadets, and midshipmen" as being subject to UCMJ. The superintendent of each academy has also been designated as a general court-martial convening authority. 'The honor codes at the Military and Air Force academies also prohibit toleration (failure to report) of those who violate the honor code. At the Naval Academy, failure to act on an honor violation is a conduct offense. 210 U.S.C. 802(a)(2). |