Article 86 and 91 Essay
Article 86 and Article 91 under UCMJ I am doing an essay on article 86 and 91 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Article 86—Absence without leave and Article 91—Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer I will start out with article 91 section 15 text of statute 2 willfully disobeys the lawful order of a warrant officer , non-commissioned officer, or petty officer. In my essay I will give both facts and opinion on the matter of these articles .
In fact in of the case article 91 does not apply in the situation that involves me and fellow NCO’s because in article 91 chapter 15 subparagraph 2, I did not willfully disobey an order . In order to disobey an order the first must be given the order and no order given, there was only an implied task, not a verbal order saying to be at a certain place at a certain time. We were told that the first sergeant was coming to check the NCO’s counseling packets; there was no specified time to show up.
In order to willfully disobey an order the accused must know the order in the first place. Now in the case of me and other NCO’s were accused of disobeying a noncommissioned officer if you look at article 91 in elements of section 2(B) states that the accused received a certain lawful order from a certain warrant, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer (C) that the accused then knew that the person was a warrant, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer;(D) the accused had a duty to obey the order and the accused willfully disobeyed the order.
I in fact just from the statement above I did not willfully disobey an order. I have never been late nor have I intentionally disobeyed an order from a senior noncommissioned officer and the only way I would, is if it were immoral, dishonest or dangerous. And from Article 86 reads “(1) Failure to go to appointed place of duty. (a) That a certain authority appointed a certain time and place of duty for the accused (b) That the accused knew of that time and place; and(c) That the accused, without authority, failed to go to the appointed place of duty at the time prescribed. Like I said before me and the other NCO’s did not know that we had to be in the PLL office because there wasn’t a time put out when the first sergeant was going to be there. But I can say this we could have and should have asked what time we needed to there but if we were supposed to be told then I think that was the failure on the Staff sergeant part. Ok on Article 91, Article 91 is Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned Officer or petty officer.
Now I’m trying to figure out how we were insubordinate cause in order to be insubordinate you have to know that an order was given but we were just given an implied task. It’s not like we intentaly said we were not going to at the PLL office. We went to breakfast and while we were there our staff sergeant came and got us and said”hey ya’ll need to at the office first sergeant is checking the counseling,” If we knew we had to be there we would have been there waiting for him with packets in hand.
In general article 91 is to help protect them from assault or disrespect in general according to article 89 and article 90 This article does not protect an acting noncommissioned officer or acting petty officer, nor does it protect military police or members of the shore patrol who are not warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officers. But the reason for these articles is to maintain order and punish those who violate these articles some articles are punishable by court marshal.
Now some of the articles are punishable under different sub-articles of each article because all other lawful orders which may be issued by a member of the armed forces, violations of which are not chargeable under Article 90, 91, or 92. Article 90 is assaulting or willfully disobeying superior commissioned officer, article 91 is Insubordinate conduct toward warrant officer, noncommissioned Officer or petty officer and article 92 is Failure to obey order or regulation and if you fall under any of the three you will find yourself in a court-martial and or imprisonment for however long the max or minimum requires.
In conclusion you are responsible for you actions either if you’re wrong or right. The articles are there to help protect you either you are the victim or the problem. Article 86 is set in place for accountability example if you do not tell me or if I can’t you then it is my responsibility to find you and make sure your ok but if you leave because you cannot adapt to ARMY life then you will face the conaquinces of a court marshal and/or jail, or even punished under the death penalty in time for desertion while in the time of war.
Article 91 I feel that you have to disciplined in the first place you must be able to just bite your tongue and do what you need to do and get it done . Your superior non-commissioned officer has to follow orders just like we do everything gets pushed down . If the first Sergeant said to do a job and we don’t do it then we will get ritten up for being insubordinate because we did not do what we were told everything in the army is a guide line for our protection and if you violate any article then you will be punished. But all together even though we wasn’t at our place of duty we should have asked what time we needed to in the office but since we didn’t then we have to the corrective training and put it in the past and move on to the future.