Punitive Articles of the UCMJ (Article 91 - Insubordination)

The military requires structure and discipline to function. Respect for higher ranks must be enforced, or there would be problems accomplishing missions. Insubordinate conduct is not tolerated because it is detrimental to good order and discipline.

While it is impossible to like and respect every person for their personalities or leadership styles, rank takes priority over personality in the military (although it helps to be personable). Insubordination generally occurs when someone is not happy with a decision, doesn't want to follow orders or dislikes their leadership.

Insubordination is not tolerated and is defined as a punitive offense in the military. This means you might be punished for conduct that is considered insubordinate.

What Is Insubordination?

Insubordinate conduct is striking or hitting someone of higher rank, issuing verbal or written remarks of contempt or bold comments that are rude, insulting, and directed toward a noncommissioned, petty or warrant officer.

Disrespectful behavior can be portrayed through various methods—words or acts that are rude, indifferent or insolent (silent) behavior and impertinence towards the officer and within their sight and hearing.

Bad behavior that is broadcast through social media, recordings, video or any other form of digital communications is also considered insubordinate. The conduct may not be within the sight or hearing of the person or institution it is directed toward. However, it is still intended to be contemptuous or disrespectful—the military treats this behavior the same as if it was in person.

The elements under 'contempt or disrespect' include:

• • Doing or failing to do certain acts or directing certain behavior at the officer
• • Using certain language 
• • Being disrespectful to the rank and state of the officer 

How Is Insubordination Defined?

The exact phrasing of insubordination is as follows:

“Any warrant officer or enlisted member who—

(1) strikes or assaults a warrant officer, non-commissioned officer, or petty officer while that officer is in the execution of his office;

(2) willfully disobeys the lawful order of a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer; or

(3) treats with contempt or is disrespectful in language or deportment toward a warrant officer, noncommissioned officer, or petty officer while that officer is in the execution of his office; shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.”

Acts That Are Considered Insubordinate

Striking or Hitting

(1) Striking or assaulting warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer.

(a) That the accused was a warrant officer or enlisted member;

(b) That the accused struck or assaulted a certain warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(c) That the striking or assault was committed while the victim was in the execution of office; and

(d) That the accused then knew that the person struck or assaulted was a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. Note: If the victim was the superior noncommissioned or petty officer of the accused, add the following elements

(e) That the victim was the superior noncommissioned, or petty officer of the accused; and

(f) That the accused then knew that the person struck or assaulted was the accused’s superior non-commissioned, or petty officer.

Disobedience

(2) Disobeying a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer.

(a) That the accused was a warrant officer or enlisted member;

(b) That the accused received a certain lawful order from a certain warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(c) That the accused then knew that the person giving the order was a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(d) That the accused had a duty to obey the order; and

(e) That the accused willfully disobeyed the order.

Disrespectful Conduct

(3) Treating with contempt or being disrespectful in language or deportment toward a warrant, non-commissioned, or petty officer.

(a) That the accused was a warrant officer or enlisted member;

(b) That the accused did or omitted certain acts, or used certain language;

(c) That such behavior or language was used toward and within sight or hearing of a certain warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(d) That the accused then knew that the person toward whom the behavior or language was directed was a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer;

(e) That the victim was then in the execution of office; and

(f) That under the circumstances the accused, by such behavior or language, treated with contempt or was disrespectful to said warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. Note: If the victim was the superior noncommissioned, or petty officer of the accused, add the following elements

(g) That the victim was the superior noncommissioned, or petty officer of the accused; and

(h) That the accused then knew that the person toward whom the behavior or language was directed was the accused’s superior noncommissioned, or petty officer.

Article 91 Concepts

Article 91 has the same general concepts with respect to warrant, noncommissioned, and petty officers as Articles 89 and 90 have with respect to commissioned officers, namely, to ensure obedience to their lawful orders and protect them from violence, insult, or disrespect.

Unlike Articles 89 and 90, however, this article does not require a superior-subordinate relationship as an element of any of the offenses denounced. 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.

All of the offenses prohibited by Article 91 require that the accused have actual knowledge that the victim was a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer. Actual knowledge may be proved by circumstantial evidence.

An assault by a prisoner who has been discharged from the service, or by any other civilian subject to military law, upon a warrant, noncommissioned, or petty officer should be charged under Article 128 or 134.

Defense Against an Article 91 Charge

The best method for defending yourself against an Article 91 charge is to consult a military lawyer. You have the right to request trial by court martial anytime you're officially charged with an offense. If you feel as though you're being wrongfully accused, make an appointment with the Judge Advocate General's office for advice on your options.

However, keep in mind that you shouldn't disobey, disrespect, or defame any military senior, the service, or its people. No military rule says you cannot have your own thoughts about a person or entity; however, the rules do say you cannot act on those thoughts.