RIGHT TO LEGAL REPRESENTATION DURING SUMMARY PROCEEDINGS UNDER THE MILITARY JUSTICE SYSTEM
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31436/iiumlj.v32i1.919Keywords:
Military Justice; Summary Proceedings, Summary Disposal of Charges, Court-Martial, Right to Legal RepresentationAbstract
Military justice is essential for maintaining discipline and order in the military. The Federal Constitution of Malaysia safeguards the fundamental right of individuals to be represented by a legal practitioner of their preference through Article 5(3), and Section 255 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Act 593) also provides the right of the accused to be defended before any criminal court. Additionally, Article 8 guarantees everyone equal legal protection. Thus, everyone has the right to legal representation, which is essential. Nonetheless, no provision in the Armed Forces Act 1972, Armed Forces (Court-Martial) Rules of Procedure 1976, and Armed Forces (Summary Jurisdiction) Regulation 1976 guarantees legal representation during summary proceedings. The omission of this provision will be examined through pertinent cases and compared to the United States’ position. This legal research is purely doctrinal, analysing the relevant legal provisions and court rulings. Despite the fact that the Federal Constitution ensures the right to legal representation and equality, this article argues that introducing legal representation during summary proceedings is at the discretion of the commanding officer, subordinate commander, and appropriate superior authority, taking into account the distinct characteristics of such proceedings. This article proposes a need for reform of the current law to allow army personnel to opt for court-martial and to establish an appeal mechanism for the accused.
Metrics
References
Ab.Wahab, Andika, and Aizat Khairi, “Right to justice and legal aid barriers to the vulnerable non-citizens in Malaysia.” Geografia Malaysian Journal of Society and Space Vol. 16 No. 1. (2020): 13-23.
Argersinger v. Hamlin 407 U.S. 25 (1972)
Bell Jefrey A, “Middendorf V. Henry: The Right to Counsel at Summary Courts-Martial,” Arkansas Law Review Vol. 31. No. 2 (1977): 354.
Celidon H. Pitt, “The Case for Standing Courts-Martial,” Naval Law Review Vol. 67 (2021):111-152
Chan Gary. 2007, “The Right of Access to Justice: Judicial Discourse in Singapore and Malaysia,” Asian Journal of Comparative Law Vol. 2. No. 1.
Dahari, Mej Jamal Rodzi. “An Examination On Court Martial System In Malaysia From Universal Declaration Of Human Rights Perspective.” Kertas Kerjs, Maktab Turus Angkatan Tentera, Kuala Lumpur, 2004.
Daigle v. Warner 490 F.2d 358 (9th Cir.1974)
David, Avinash Raj, “Military Justice System in India,” Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research Vol. 6 No. 3. (2019): 586-592.
Doresamy v Public Services Commission (1971) 2 MLJ 127.
Ellis Stanley G, “Military Law-Courts-Martial-Recent Cases Defining the Right to Counsel Before Summary Courts-Martial,” BYU Law Review 1975 No. 1. (1975).
Enderby Town Football Club Ltd v The Football Association Ltd, [1971] 1 ALL ER 215.
Eng, Teo Say, and Colonel Wan Nor Mazlan, Military Legal Proceedings in Malaysia. Kuala Lumpur: LexisNexis, 2009.
Eugene R. Fidell et.al.,“Equal Supreme Court Access,”The Yale Law Journal Vol. 131. (2021).
Everett, Robinson O. “Some Comments on the Role of Discretion in Military Justice.” Law and Contemporary Problems Vol. 37. No. 1. (1972): 173.
Foster Steve, “Prisoners’ Rights, Disciplinary Procedures and the Right to Legal Representation Prisoners' Disciplinary Proceedings Prison Rules 1999 Legal Representation Article of the European Convention on Human Rights Ezeh and Connors v. United Kingdom,” Journal of Civil Liberties Vol. 7. No. 3. (2002): 163-174.
Goh Chang Hon v PP [2022] 1 LNS 147.
Hansen, Victor. “The impact of military justice reforms on the law of armed conflict; how to avoid unintended consequences.” In Military Justice in the Modern Age, edited by Alison Duxbury and Matthew Groves, 120. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
Hotel Malaya Sdn Bhd & Anor v. National Union of Hotel, Bar & Restaurant Workers & Anor [1982] CLJ Rep 124
Jackson & Co v Napper [1886] 35 Ch D 162 172.
Jefrey A. Bell, “Middendorf v. Henry the Right to Counsel,” Arkansas Law Review Vol. 31, No. 2 (1977).
Jennifer K.Elsea and Jonathan M.Gaffney, “Military Courts-Martial under the Military Justice Act of 2016” (2020). https://crsreports.congress.gov.
Justice Anthony Kennedy, “Written Constitutions and the Common Law Tradition.” In The Sultan Azlan Shah Law Lectures Ii Rule of Law, Written Constitutions & the Common Law Tradition, edited by Visu Sinnadurai, 209-67. Kuala Lumpur RNS Publications, 2006.
Kenneth M. Theurer and James W. Russell II., “Why Military Justice Matters,” The Reporter, Vol. 37, No. 2 (Summer 2010): 7-10
Keong, Chan Sek. “Speech by the Attorney-General and the SAF Judge Advocate-General, Mr Chan Sek Keong, at the Opening of the New SAF Court- Martial Centre Held on Saturday, 21 Oct 2000 at 0900 hrs at Kranji, Choa Chu Kang Way.” Kranji, Choa Chu Kang Way. (2000). https://www.nas.gov.sg/archivesonline/speeches/record-details/6ee85f77-330c-11e8-85cf-001a4a5ba61b
Leonard R. Piotrowski, “The Right to Counsel at a Summary Court-Martial,”Army Lawyer Vol. 3 (1977).
Lt Kol Syed Ismail bin Syed Omar, “Military law: Jurisprudence and jurisdiction,” Malayan Law Journal Articles Vol. 2. (1997): 9-10.
Manual for Courts-Martial (MCM), United States (2019 Edition).
Marathaei d/o Sangulullai (suing on behalf of the estate of ThangayahAupulley) & Anor v. Syarikat JG Containers (M) Sdn Bhd & Anor [2003] 2 MLJ 337.
Mark A. Sternlicht, “Military Law Right to Counsel,” North Carolina Law Review Vol.55 (1976).
Michael L. Grove, “The Summary Court-Martial in Constitutional Perspective,” Houston Law Review Vol. 14, No. 2 (1977).
Middendorf v. Henry 425 U.S. 25 (1976)
Morales, Eleanor T. and Brooker, John W, “Restoring Faith in Military Justice,” Connecticut Law Review Vol. 55. (2022): 77-134.
Mundell v Mellor [1992] SSLR 152
New Zealand Ministry of Defence. “Summary Report on Military Justice,” https://www.defence.govt.nz/assets/publication/file/c17cd46f5c/Summary-Report-on-Military-Justice.pdf
Patricia A. Daly, “The Right to Counsel at Summary Courts-Martial,” Indiana Law Journal Vol. 52, No. 1. (1976).
Pengarah Tanah dan Galian, Wilayah Persekutuan v Sri Lembah Enterprise Sdn Bhd [1979] 1 MLJ 135.
Pett v Greyhound Racing Association Ltd [1968] 2 WLR 1471.
R v Assessment Committee of Saint Mary Abbotts, Kensington [1891] 1 QB 378
R v Secretary of State for the Home Department, ex parte Tarrant [1985] QB 251.
Rachel E. VanLandingham, Dr. Grazvydas Jasutis, and Kristina Cernejute. “Military Justice.” DCAF - Geneva Centre for Security Sector Governance. (2023). https://www.dcaf.ch/sites/default/files/publications/documents/MilitaryJusticeFundamentals.pdf.
Rosenblatt Franklin D., “Nonjudicial Punishment,” Villanova Law Review Vol. 68, No. 5 (2024): 807-48
Salim Ibrahim Ali, Dr. Zuryati Mohamed Yusoff, and Dr. Zainal Amin Ayub, “Legal Research of Doctrinal and Non-Doctrinal,” International Journal of Trend in Research and Development Vol. 4. No. (1). (2017).
Scott W. Stucky, “Appellate Review of Courts-Martial,”Catholic University Law Review Vol. 69. No. 4 (2020):797-805.
Sithambaran v Attorney-General [1972] 2 MLJ 175.
Steven E. Asher, “Reforming the Summary Court-Martial,” Columbia Law Review 79, No. 1 (1979).
Tshivhase, Aifheli. "The future of military summary trials in the modern age." In Military Justice in the Modern Age, edited by Alison Duxbury and Matthew Groves, 347-364. United Kingdom: Cambridge University Press, 2016.
Tzu, Sun. Sun Tzu on the Art of War the Oldest Military Treatise In The World. Translated by Lionel Giles (1910). England: Allandale Online Publishing. (2000).
United Nations A/HRC/28/32.
United States v. Alderman C.M.A. 298, 46 C.M.R. 298 (1973)
United States v. Tucker 404 U.S. 443 (1972)
United States Department of Defence. “Military Justice Overview,” https://vwac.defense.gov/military.aspx.
Vashakmadze, Mindia. “Understanding military justice: A practice note.” Geneva: The Geneva Centre for the Democratic Control of Armed Forces (DCAF). (2018). https://www.dcaf.ch/sites/default/files/publications/documents/Military-Justice_Prictice-Note_eng.pdf
Weill, Sharon and Robinson, Mitch, “The Decaux Principles on the Administration of Justice,”Reciprocite et Universalite: Sources et regimes du droit international des droits de I’hommeMelangesenI’honneur du Proffesseur Emmanuel Decaux Collectif, 553 (2017). https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3095408
Zhou, Jian. Fundamentals of Military Law: A Chinese Perspective. China: Law Press China-Springer. (2019).
Yale Draft Principles for Military Summary Proceedings, https://puc.overheid.nl/PUC/Handlers/DownloadBijlage
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
- Consent to publish: The Author(s) undertakes that the article named above is original and consents that the IIUM Press publishes it.
- Previous publication: The Author(s) guarantees that the article named above has not been published before in any form, that it is not concurrently submitted to another publication, and that it does not infringe anyone’s copyright. The Author(s) holds the IIUM Press and Editors of IIUM Law Journal harmless against all copyright claims.
- Transfer of copyright: The Author(s) hereby transfers the copyright of the article to the IIUM Press, which shall have the exclusive and unlimited right to publish the article in any form, including on electronic media. The Journal in turn grants the Author(s) the right to reproduce the article for educational and scientific purposes, provided the written consent of the Publisher is obtained.
