Military officers dating enlisted
So in this sense, the OPNAVINST is more stringent than the UCMJ.
That is OK..is, it is permissible for the Navy to set its rules, as required, to maintain good order and discipline.
Article 15 punishments may include (but are not limited to): A case considered flagrant or involving other serious circumstances may result in a court-martial.
As with any court-martial process, the accused has access to counsel, the right to appeal, and many of the same rights civilian defendants have.
The policy specified certain relationships that are always improper such as relationships between officers and enlisted service members that are personal, involve ongoing business, or involve gambling.
However, any other type of relationship can also be prohibited if it has an adverse effect on a unit or chain of command, which can include just the appearance of impropriety.
Not the same as a charge under Art 134, Fraternization. This article discusses the basics of fraternization in the military, the likelihood of facing charges, consequences, and possible defenses.See Find Law's Military Criminal Law section for related articles and resources. Each branch of the military used to have its own set of rules governing fraternization, but this changed in 1999 when the Department of Defense issued a issued a uniform policy for all branches to follow.The maximum punishment for a guilty verdict in a court-martial for fraternization is dismissal, forfeiture of pay, and confinement for two years.Defenses to Fraternization Charges Simply because someone is charged with fraternization doesn't mean that the accused lacks any recourse. Such a rule would likely violate the US Constitution. The problem could be if there was a marriage, the Navy could investigate any pre marriage relationship. Example, Art 86 UCMJ, is the section that requires members to be at their jobs, on time. Am I right in understanding that the opnavinst prohibits te relationship but by the UCMJ it cannot be charged if it does not affect the good order and discipline? The answer is that the UCMJ is the general law..is the framework for the instructions that are used to regulate conduct in the service. As well as an article demonstrating that a navy officer dated an enlisted marine and the case was dismissed because it did not meet #5 since they would not interact in a professional relationship. Otherwise, please rate the answer so I may get credit for my work. But the Navy does not have such a provision in its regulation. However, when I looked up the UCMJ offense I found this: According to the MCM, the “elements of proof” for the offense of fraternization are: That the accused was a commissioned or warrant officer; That the accused fraternized on terms of military equality with one or more certain enlisted member(s) in a certain manner; That the accused then knew the person(s) to be (an) enlisted member(s); That such fraternization violated the custom of the accused’s service that officers shall not fraternize with enlisted members on terms of military equality; and That, under the circumstances, the conduct of the accused was to the prejudice of good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces. The Army regulation has a rule that allows marriage within 1 year for the circumstances you describe. I looked up the opnavinst and saw how the relationship is prohibited.It sets the Navy policy..it states that for officer/enlisted personal relations are prohibited.