Article 15 / Non-Judicial Punishment

Should You Accept This Military Discipline

For service members facing a disciplinary issue, an Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ), commonly known as Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP), often seems like a straightforward and less severe alternative to a court-martial. It’s frequently presented as a quick way to resolve minor misconduct and move forward. However, this apparent simplicity can be highly deceptive. Underestimating the true impact of an Article 15 can lead to hidden, severe consequences that profoundly affect a service member’s career, financial stability, and future benefits.

The decision to accept or refuse an Article 15 is one of the most critical choices a service member will make during their time in uniform. It is a complex strategic calculation that requires immediate and expert guidance. This comprehensive guide will dissect what an Article 15 entails, illuminate your fundamental rights, expose the often-overlooked collateral consequences, and provide insight into making this pivotal decision. Understanding the nuances of NJP is essential for every service member to protect their hard-earned career and future.

I. What is Article 15 UCMJ (Non-Judicial Punishment – NJP)?

Article 15 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice grants commanding officers the authority to impose punishment for minor offenses without the intervention of a court-martial. This power is designed to provide commanders with a swift and efficient means to address misconduct and maintain discipline within their units.

A. Definition and Purpose

NJP is a disciplinary action that allows a commander to determine guilt or innocence and impose punishment independently. It is explicitly “non-judicial,” meaning it does not go through the formal court system and, on its own, does not result in a federal criminal conviction. It serves as an alternative to a court-martial for offenses deemed less severe, but still requiring formal disciplinary action.

While “Article 15” is the UCMJ designation, service members in different branches may know it by other names:

• Army & Air Force: Article 15
• Navy & Marine Corps: Captain’s Mast (or Admiral’s Mast for higher-ranking commanders)
• Coast Guard: Office Hours

B. Types of Article 15s and Their Punishment Authority

The maximum punishment that can be imposed under an Article 15 varies depending on the rank of the commander imposing it, and the type of NJP:

• Summarized Article 15: This is the least severe form, typically used for minor infractions by company-grade officers. Punishments are strictly limited, usually to minor restrictions (e.g., 14 days restriction, 14 days extra duties, oral reprimand, 7 days forfeiture of pay).
• Company-Grade Article 15: Imposed by commanders who are O-3 (Captain/Lieutenant) or below. It allows for more substantial punishments than a Summarized NJP but less than a Field-Grade NJP. Punishments can include up to 14 days confinement on bread and water (if on a vessel), 30 days restriction or extra duties, 7 days correctional custody, reduction in rank for enlisted personnel, and forfeiture of half a month’s pay for two months.
• Field-Grade Article 15: This is the most severe type of NJP, imposed by commanders who are O-4 (Major/Lieutenant Commander) or above. Their punishment authority is the broadest under NJP, allowing for:
  • Up to 45 days confinement on bread and water (if on a vessel).
  • Up to 60 days restriction or extra duties.
  • Up to 30 days correctional custody (for E-4 and below).
  • Reduction in rank to the lowest pay grade for enlisted personnel.
  • Forfeiture of half a month’s pay for two months.
  • For commissioned officers, Field-Grade NJP can impose a reprimand, forfeiture of half a month’s pay for two months, and 60 days restriction.

C. Common Offenses Leading to NJP

Article 15s are typically used for “minor” offenses, though what constitutes “minor” can sometimes be subjective. Common examples include:

• Minor Unauthorized Absence (AWOL).
• Disrespectful conduct toward a superior noncommissioned officer or officer.
• Dereliction of duty (neglecting duties or performing them inefficiently).
• Minor instances of wrongful fraternization.
• Failure to obey a lawful order or regulation.
• Minor assault or disorderly conduct.
• Alcohol-related misconduct (e.g., underage drinking, public intoxication, minor DUIs).
• Possession of drug paraphernalia.

II. Your Fundamental Rights When Facing NJP: A Critical Decision Point

When presented with an Article 15, you are not simply being handed a punishment; you are being offered a choice. Understanding and exercising your rights at this stage is absolutely critical, as it can define the entire trajectory of your case and your career.

A. The Paramount Choice: Accept NJP or Demand a Court-Martial?

One of the most fundamental rights under Article 15 is the ability to refuse NJP and demand trial by court-martial. This right is a cornerstone of due process in the military justice system. With very limited exceptions (primarily for service members who are attached to or embarked in a vessel), you cannot be forced to accept NJP. If you refuse, your commander must then decide whether to:

• Drop the charges.
• Pursue administrative action (such as administrative separation).
• Refer the case to a court-martial.

This decision is often the most important strategic choice a service member will face. It involves weighing the risks and benefits of a less formal disciplinary process against the full protections and higher burden of proof offered by a court-martial.

B. Other Key Rights Afforded When Offered NJP

Even if you ultimately decide to accept the NJP, you retain several other important rights:

• Right to be Informed of Charges and Evidence: You must be provided with a written statement of the specific charges against you and be allowed to review the evidence the commander is relying upon to support those charges.
• Right to Consult with Military Counsel: Before making any decision about the NJP, you have the absolute right to consult with a detailed military attorney (such as those from the Trial Defense Service or a Staff Judge Advocate’s Office). This consultation is vital for understanding your options and the potential consequences.
• Right to Present Matters in Defense, Mitigation, or Extenuation: You are entitled to present your side of the story, offer evidence to deny guilt, explain your actions, or present mitigating factors (e.g., character statements, awards, positive performance evaluations, extenuating circumstances). This can be done verbally at the hearing or in a written submission.
• Right to Have a Spokesperson: You can have a commissioned officer, warrant officer, or enlisted member (typically senior in rank or experience to you) act as your spokesperson during the NJP hearing. This person can present your defense or mitigation on your behalf.
• Right to Appeal the NJP Decision: If you accept the NJP and are found guilty or believe the punishment imposed is unjust or disproportionate, you have the right to appeal the decision to the next higher commander in the chain of command.
• Right to an Open Hearing: While not an absolute right, you can request that your NJP hearing be open to the public, although the commander has discretion to keep it closed.

III. The Deceptive Allure: Why Accepting NJP Can Be Risky

The offer of an Article 15 often comes with a subtle pressure to accept, painted as the “easy way out” to avoid a more severe court-martial. However, this perceived ease frequently conceals significant disadvantages and limitations on your due process rights that can have long-term negative consequences.

A. Perceived Advantages (Often Misleading)

Service members may be inclined to accept NJP due to several perceived benefits:

• Quicker Resolution: NJP typically concludes much faster than a court-martial, offering a rapid path to put the incident behind you.
• Commander Decides: For some, having their own commander make the decision feels less intimidating or more familiar than facing a military judge or court-martial panel.
• Avoidance of “Criminal” Label (Directly): On its own, an NJP does not directly result in a federal criminal conviction, unlike a court-martial.
• Less Formal Process: The informality of NJP can seem preferable to the rigid, adversarial nature of a court-martial.

B. Hidden Disadvantages and Due Process Limitations

The allure of NJP often overshadows its significant hidden risks and procedural shortcomings:

• Lower Standard of Proof: “Preponderance of the Evidence”: This is a critical distinction. At an NJP, the commander only needs to believe that the alleged misconduct is “more likely than not” (a greater than 50% probability) to have occurred to impose punishment. In a court-martial, the prosecution must prove guilt “beyond a reasonable doubt”—a much higher and more difficult standard to meet. This significantly reduces the government’s burden to prove guilt.
• Relaxed Rules of Evidence: NJP proceedings do not adhere to the strict Military Rules of Evidence that apply in a court-martial. This means the commander can consider hearsay, unverified allegations, and other forms of evidence that would be inadmissible in a formal criminal trial, making it harder for the service member to object to unfavorable evidence.
• No Cross-Examination: You do not have the right to directly cross-examine witnesses or accusers against you. This severely limits your ability to challenge their credibility, expose inconsistencies in their statements, or fully present your defense.
• Commander as Multiple Roles: In an NJP, the commander often acts as accuser, investigator, prosecutor, and the final decision-maker regarding guilt and punishment. This inherent conflict of interest makes it challenging to ensure true impartiality.
• Limited Due Process: Many of the robust due process protections found in a court-martial (e.g., formal discovery of evidence, formal motions, the right to a lawyer present during the hearing) are absent in NJP.
• Effective Admission of Guilt: While not a federal criminal conviction, accepting an Article 15 and its associated punishment is effectively an admission of guilt to the alleged misconduct for your permanent military record. This can be used against you in future administrative actions.

The perceived “ease” of NJP is often deceptive. By sacrificing critical due process rights and facing a lower standard of proof, service members can inadvertently expose themselves to adverse findings that carry significant, unforeseen, and lasting collateral consequences.

IV. Collateral Consequences: The Unseen and Lasting Impact of NJP

The direct punishments imposed by an Article 15 (e.g., reduction in rank, forfeiture of pay) are often minor compared to the severe “collateral” administrative actions that can follow. These unseen impacts can irrevocably damage a service member’s military career, financial stability, and future veteran benefits.

A. Career Implications: A Stunted or Ended Military Service

• Mandatory Negative Evaluation Reports (NCOERs/OERs): One of the most immediate and devastating consequences. An Article 15 conviction typically mandates the filing of an adverse evaluation report in your permanent personnel file (e.g., a “referred” NCOER or OER). In a highly competitive and often downsizing military, such a negative evaluation can be a career-ender, making you ineligible for promotion, desirable assignments, or continued service.
• Promotion Delays or Inability: A negative evaluation or the NJP itself will significantly hinder or completely prevent promotion. Promotion boards meticulously scrutinize disciplinary history, and an NJP signals a failure to meet leadership and conduct standards.
• Denial of Re-enlistment: An NJP can directly lead to a denial of re-enlistment, especially for service members approaching High Year Tenure (HYT). This means you could be involuntarily forced out of the military even if you wish to continue serving.
• Loss of Opportunities: NJP can disqualify you from special duties, preferred assignments, leadership positions, and critical military schooling (e.g., Professional Military Education, specialized training).
• Administrative Separation: An NJP conviction can directly serve as a basis for involuntary administrative separation from service. This is particularly concerning for junior service members (those with less than six years of service) as the command may not need to provide an administrative separation board. This can result in an “Other Than Honorable” (OTH) discharge, further compounding negative consequences.

B. Financial Implications

• Direct Forfeiture of Pay: NJP often includes the forfeiture of pay, leading to immediate financial loss.
• Bonus Recoupment: If you received a re-enlistment bonus or a bonus for a specific MOS/rating or schooling (e.g., nuclear power, flight school), and are subsequently administratively separated due to the NJP, the U.S. Government may attempt to recoup a pro rata (proportional) amount of that bonus.

C. Veterans’ Benefits Implications

• Indirect Loss of VA Benefits: While an NJP itself doesn’t directly cause a loss of Veterans Affairs (VA) benefits, its most severe collateral consequence—an “Other Than Honorable” (OTH) administrative separation—can result in ineligibility for nearly all VA benefits, including the Post-9/11 GI Bill, Montgomery GI Bill, VA healthcare, disability compensation, and VA home loans. This represents a potential loss of hundreds of thousands of dollars in educational and medical value.

D. Civilian Life Implications

• Civilian Employment Challenges: Although an NJP is not a federal criminal conviction, it becomes part of your official military record. This record can be discoverable in background checks, particularly for federal government jobs or positions requiring security clearances. Explaining an NJP and its underlying cause can be a significant hurdle in a civilian job interview.
• Security Clearances: The underlying misconduct that led to the NJP, and the NJP itself, will be scrutinized during any security clearance application or re-investigation. Depending on the nature of the misconduct and the severity of the NJP, it can lead to denial, suspension, or revocation of your security clearance, impacting future employment in sensitive sectors.
• Reputation: Within the military community and potentially in civilian life, a history of NJP can impact your professional reputation and standing.

The cumulative effect of these collateral consequences often far outweighs the initial punishment handed down at an Article 15. This is why a seemingly “minor” disciplinary action can, without proper defense, become a career-ending event.

V. Making the Critical Decision: To Accept or Refuse NJP?

The choice to accept or refuse an Article 15 is one of the most consequential decisions a service member will face. It’s a complex risk-benefit analysis that should never be made without immediate and thorough consultation with an experienced military defense attorney. There is no one-size-fits-all answer; the optimal path depends on the unique facts of your case, your goals, and the potential outcomes.

A. Key Factors to Weigh in Your Decision

• Strength of the Government’s Evidence: How compelling is the evidence against you? Is it based on reliable testimony, strong documents, or mere allegations? Can the government prove the misconduct by a “preponderance of the evidence” at NJP, or “beyond a reasonable doubt” at a court-martial?
• Severity of the Alleged Misconduct: What is the specific UCMJ article you are accused of violating? What is the maximum punishment for that offense under the UCMJ, both at NJP and at a court-martial?
• Your Military Record and Career Goals: Do you have a history of exemplary service or prior disciplinary issues? Your past record will influence how your commander views the NJP and how a court-martial panel might view you. Do you want to remain in the military, or are you looking to separate? Your career goals will heavily influence the risk you’re willing to take.
• Undiscovered Misconduct: Is there any other potential misconduct that could surface if the case proceeds to a more thorough court-martial investigation? Refusing NJP opens your case to a full investigation.
• Proximity to EAS/ETS or High Year Tenure (HYT): If you are close to your End of Active Service (EAS/ETS) or approaching HYT, the collateral consequences (like administrative separation) might be more immediate and severe, making the decision more urgent.
• Potential for Plea Bargain (if Refused): If you refuse NJP and the case is referred to a court-martial, is there potential to negotiate a favorable plea agreement for lesser charges or a more lenient sentence?

B. When Refusing NJP May Be the Best Option (Demanding Court-Martial)

While counter-intuitive for some, refusing NJP and demanding a court-martial can be the best strategic choice in several situations, as it grants you significant due process protections:

• Innocence and Strong Defense: If you are truly innocent and believe the government cannot prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt in a court-martial, demanding a trial is essential to preserve your reputation and avoid an unjust finding of guilt.
• Weak Government Evidence: If the government’s evidence is weak, circumstantial, or relies heavily on hearsay that would be inadmissible in a court-martial under the stricter Military Rules of Evidence.
• Significant Collateral Consequences of NJP: If accepting the NJP (especially a Field-Grade) will likely lead to an OTH administrative separation, denial of re-enlistment, or other severe career-ending consequences, the risk of a court-martial might be justified to fight for a better outcome with higher legal standards.
• Desire for Full Due Process: If you want the full protection of the UCMJ, including formal discovery of evidence, the ability to cross-examine witnesses, strict rules of evidence, the higher “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of proof, and the right to have a lawyer present at your hearing.
• Leveraging Negotiation: Refusing NJP can sometimes open the door for plea negotiations for lesser charges or administrative separation, if the government is reluctant to pursue a court-martial for a particular offense.

It is generally a poor strategy to accept NJP with the intent of later appealing the charges, as winning an NJP appeal is exceptionally difficult. If you believe you are innocent, demanding a court-martial is often the most direct path to fight for your rights.

C. When Accepting NJP May Be Considered

In limited scenarios, accepting an Article 15 might be the more pragmatic choice, but only after careful consultation with legal counsel:

• Overwhelming Evidence of Guilt: If the evidence against you is undeniable and a court-martial conviction is highly probable with far worse outcomes (e.g., punitive discharge, lengthy confinement). In such cases, NJP might represent a negotiated, albeit informal, “best-case scenario” to limit the damage.
• Very Minor Punishment & Minimal Collateral Impact: If the alleged offense is truly minor, the proposed NJP punishment is minimal (e.g., a summarized NJP with no reduction in rank or loss of pay), and your attorney confirms there are unlikely to be any significant collateral consequences for your career or benefits. This allows for a quick resolution without further legal entanglement.
• Specific, Binding Agreement from Commander (Rare): If the commander offers a guaranteed favorable outcome in writing (e.g., no negative evaluation, no administrative separation) in exchange for accepting NJP. Such guarantees are rare and must be thoroughly reviewed by counsel to ensure they are binding and enforceable.

VI. The Role of Legal Counsel in NJP Cases

The decision to accept or refuse an Article 15 is complex and carries significant risks. Commanders are trained to present NJP as a favorable option, but only an experienced military defense attorney can truly assess the long-term implications and guide you to the best decision for your unique circumstances.

A. Before Deciding: Essential Consultation

Upon being offered an Article 15, your absolute first step should be to consult with a military defense attorney. During this crucial pre-NJP consultation, your lawyer will:

• Analyze Charges and Evidence: Thoroughly review the specific UCMJ article(s) you are accused of violating, assess the strength of the government’s evidence against you, and identify potential weaknesses in their case.
• Advise on Your Rights: Ensure you fully understand your rights, particularly the absolute right to demand a trial by court-martial, and how to properly invoke them.
• Expose Collateral Consequences: Provide a realistic and comprehensive assessment of all potential collateral consequences (career impact, benefits, administrative separation risks) that may arise from accepting the NJP or refusing it.
• Develop a Strategic Plan: Based on your goals (e.g., staying in the military, avoiding a bad discharge, fighting for innocence), your attorney will help you develop a comprehensive strategy: whether to accept NJP and mitigate punishment, or refuse it and prepare for a potential court-martial.
• Assist with the “Demand Trial by Court-Martial” Decision: Guide you through the nuanced pros and cons of demanding a court-martial, weighing the risks against the potential for a better outcome through full due process.

B. If Accepting NJP: Preparing Your Response

If, after careful consultation, the strategic decision is made to accept the NJP, your attorney will help you prepare the strongest possible response to mitigate the punishment and minimize collateral damage:

• Crafting Compelling Statements: Assist in drafting your written or oral statement to the commander, which can deny guilt, explain circumstances, or present mitigating factors effectively.
• Gathering Favorable Evidence: Help you collect and present evidence such as character letters from supervisors and peers, awards, positive performance evaluations, and documentation of any underlying issues (e.g., mental health, family hardship) that might have contributed to the alleged misconduct.
• Advocating for Lighter Punishment: Present persuasive arguments to the commander for the lightest possible punishment and to prevent any future negative administrative actions (e.g., no negative evaluation, no administrative separation).

C. If Refusing NJP: Preparing for Potential Court-Martial

If the strategic decision is made to refuse NJP and demand a court-martial, your attorney will immediately pivot to preparing an aggressive defense for a criminal trial:

• Full Investigation and Discovery: Conduct an independent investigation, interview witnesses, gather evidence, and demand full discovery from the prosecution to understand their entire case.
• Developing a Robust Defense Strategy: Formulate specific legal arguments based on the UCMJ, Military Rules of Evidence, and relevant case law (e.g., challenging evidence, asserting defenses, identifying procedural flaws).
• Negotiating with the Prosecution: Engage in strategic negotiations for a plea bargain to lesser charges or a more favorable sentence, if appropriate, to avoid the maximum penalties.
• Aggressive Trial Representation: Provide zealous advocacy in court-martial, including voir dire, opening statements, cross-examination of government witnesses, presentation of defense witnesses, and compelling closing arguments.

D. Appealing NJP

While challenging, your attorney can also assist if you wish to appeal an NJP decision after it has been imposed. Appeals are generally allowed if the punishment is considered unjust or disproportionate. Your attorney can identify the strongest grounds for appeal and prepare the necessary arguments and documentation to present to the next higher commander.

Conclusion

An Article 15 (Non-Judicial Punishment) is rarely as simple as it initially appears. What might seem to be a quick disciplinary action can quickly escalate, leading to severe collateral consequences that impact your evaluations, promotions, re-enlistment eligibility, and even your eligibility for hard-earned veteran benefits. The perceived ease of acceptance often masks the harsh reality of sacrificing critical due process rights and facing a less fair process than a court-martial.

The decision to accept or refuse an Article 15 is a pivotal strategic crossroads for your military career and future. It should never be made without immediate, expert legal counsel. An experienced military defense attorney can dissect the charges, evaluate the evidence, predict collateral consequences, and guide you through the complex choice of accepting the NJP or demanding a court-martial to fight for your rights with full due process.

Do not gamble with your military career and future. An Article 15 demands expert legal advice.

Contact a military defense attorney immediately for a confidential consultation.

Article 15 / Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP)

How to Fight Back Against NJP and Save Your Military Career

What Is Article 15?

Article 15 of the UCMJ allows commanders to impose punishment for minor offenses without a formal court-martial. Also known as Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP), it’s one of the most common ways service members are disciplined—and one of the most misunderstood.

Types of Article 15

• Summarized NJP: Low-level punishment. No formal hearing. Limited rights. Short-term punishments.
• Company Grade NJP: Imposed by a Captain (O-3) or equivalent. More serious than summarized. Limited rights but greater consequences.
• Field Grade NJP: Imposed by a Major (O-4) or above. Includes maximum punishment authority for NJP. Can ruin your career.

Do You Have a Choice?

Yes—if you’re not on a ship. You can refuse NJP and demand a court-martial, especially if the allegations are serious, unsupported, or career-ending. But this decision must be strategic. A court-martial is public and carries greater risk. Talk to a lawyer first.

Your Rights at Article 15

• Right to remain silent
• Right to review the evidence
• Right to speak or remain silent at the hearing
• Right to call witnesses or submit written matters
• Right to appeal the outcome

How to Fight an NJP

• Demand evidence in writing
• Submit a rebuttal with written statements, text messages, or witness accounts
• Challenge command bias or unlawful command influence
• Be professional in every interaction—commanders document your conduct
• Consider requesting a court-martial if the case is weak

Common Article 15 Allegations

• Drinking violations / underage alcohol use
• Disrespect to an NCO or officer
• AWOL / missed movement
• Fraternization or adultery
• Uniform or performance violations

Why NJPs Matter

An NJP doesn’t put you in jail—but it can still destroy your career. It can lead to loss of rank, pay, and even involuntary separation. Many soldiers, sailors, and airmen are separated after an NJP because they didn’t fight back when they could have.

FAQ – People Also Ask

Can I refuse NJP?

Yes—unless you’re on a ship or deployed. Most land-based service members have the right to demand trial by court-martial instead.

Can I appeal an Article 15?

Yes. You can submit an appeal to a higher commander within 5 calendar days. Include new evidence or arguments.

Can I bring a lawyer to the NJP hearing?

You don’t have a right to representation at the hearing itself, but you can consult a military or civilian attorney beforehand to help prepare your rebuttal.