Change background image
  1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Reworking the SCUJ

Discussion in 'Suggestions & Feedback' started by Outboarduniform, Jun 13, 2021.

  1. I want to start this off by saying that I believe that the SCUJ is too skeletal. It simply could do better for everyone if more options were included. The SCUJ is rarely used enough, and I firmly believe that these additions, or rather, old reconstitutions of the older, more archaic Military Law of around 2017, would be beneficial for the roleplay we have right now, when it comes to the application of the SCUJ.

    There are various small tidbits which I will consolidate here, before I move onto the actual old, and edited charges, that I believe should be readded back in, but still kept to a shorter point for more brevity.

    • Civilians, such as the passengers, may be tried by a Court-Martial for committing certain High Crimes during Code Red or above.
    This one is almost a no brainer. Certain loopholes legally still exist in the SCUJ/Sol Central Government Law apparatus that as a civilian you can participate in an active mutiny, and not have a charge levied against you for it. This would reintroduce civilians back into the system so that they can be punished for their actions during especially grievous acts and in especially dire times aboard the Torch.
    • In the event the individual accused of a crime is an Officer, Line or Staff, the charges must be approved and presented personally by the Commanding Officer.
    This adds a lot of drama and flair you usually don't see anymore. Very fond memories of usage of this to dramatic RP affect.

    • *If the Commanding Officer breaks SCG Law, charges must be presented by the Executive Officer, or next ranking Line Officer. If there is no ranking Line Officer, the duty falls to the SCG Representative, and then to Staff Officers. If there are no ranking Line Officers, Staff Officers, or SCG Representative, the CO cannot be removed from command unless there is lethal danger to the crew.
    This one is not very common, but to have it codified in this procedure is an incredibly good way to have RP during revolution and other rounds where justification is actually given. Instead, you are left guessing if you are an SCGR or CoS/XO looking for how to oust your tyrannical CO. You might even use it in other situations, rather unfortunately.

    • Charges and punishments can be appealed to the highest civil authority, in this case the SCGR.
    Should be there but isn't. It just makes sense.
    Now, onto specific charges. To start with, Greater Offences:

    | '''Desertion''

    | To abandon a post or Duty without permission, without the intention of returning

    | Fairly serious, if committed during lower alerts, confinement until transfer is appropriate. If committed during an attack, or high alert, execution is not uncalled for.

    Need I say more on this one?

    | '''Compelling Surrender'''

    | To compel a superior to surrender themselves, personnel under their command, or material under their command.

    | Only applies to subordinates advising that superiors surrender, or surrendering for a superior without authorization.

    It may be personal opinion but honestly I find it quite goofy when a mixture of Government and Military officers simply give up their men or give up specific material/command to raiders or mercs without even attempting to put up a fight. Being forced to surrender is a different story though, however. There is a clear distinction between the two.

    Moving onto lesser offenses:

    | '''Noncompliance with Procedure'''

    | To knowingly fail to enforce or obey an official procedure.

    | This is failing to obey SOP/Arrest Procedure/Trial Procedure.

    General Article could "technically" cover this, but this is enough of a common occurrence for it to warrant its own charge, honestly.

    | '''Inebriation on Duty'''

    | To drink to excess or impairment while on duty.

    | Applies to people who aren’t security.

    Same principle as before. Chief Petty Officer's should be charged if they get blasted in the Chow Hall.

    | '''Fraternization'''

    | To form inappropriate relationships with, or to interact with immediate superiors or subordinates in an inappropriate manner.

    | Don't date anyone that is in command of you or you are in command of.

    By Allah does this one deserve it's own charge.

    There were some other ones I thought about adding, but honestly, this is probably the most I'd be willing to add. Not that SCUJ has much to begin with. But we don't exactly need "Misbehavior of a Sentinel" or "Misbehavior as a prisoner" onboard the Torch, because that can get handled a certain way anyways without a charge, and happens so rarely you might as well RP it out at that point.

    The other real kicker to adding these certain ones back in is that the wiki is already edited to where this system was in place, anyways. For example, the High Crimes have certain ones italicized, which used to be the marker to which a civilian could be tried for them in Court Martial, and so forth.

    It's up to the people on how these should be worded or implemented, but I still firmly believe that these are tasteful additions to law and the SCUJ, outside of the argument of bloat, which I fail to see anyways, considering that the SCUJ charges consist of like 3 inches of a whole page anyways. Greater and Lesser Offences included.
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2021
  2. GeneralCamo

    GeneralCamo Assistant

    Forget the SCUJ, this should outright be part of standard laws as -treason-, with severe punishments whether or not it's a code red. Perhaps the SCUJ could expand treason to allow executions, but its lack of inclusion in even civilian laws is questionable from a lore perspective (So SolGov has no laws to prevent civilians from just openly supporting the Magnitkans or the Terrans in a war?)

    This is currently in the SCUJ, as "abandonment of duty".

    This needs to be clarified to only ban actions, not words. Banning advisement of surrender would not serve a legitimate purpose. I'm not even sure how well this would work.

    This is, technically, general article or conduct unbecoming.

    This is, word-for-word, a current charge in the SCUJ.
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2021
  3. Desertion sounds better, and is the correct charge to have, rather than Abandonment of Duty, which I find rather odd. This is just generally speaking. It's a weirdly reworded charge that gets to the same place.

    This is how it was originally worded in the SCMJ. Personally I would edit it to:
    "To refuse a superior's lawful order and surrender, or, as a superior, to unlawfully insist upon the needless surrender of your command, or material under your command."
    There are most likely more abbreviated or better ways to word that, I still think.

    I mean, yes, but having it as a separate charge I feel is more beneficial to achieving the end result when applying the SCUJ.

    I'm not sure how I even missed that one, definite smoothbrain moment. Edited.
  4. Spookerton

    Spookerton Public Kōhai №1 Head Developer Head Administrator Game Administrator IPC Species Maintainer Donator

  5. CubecsMelody

    CubecsMelody Petty Officer First Class

    This isnt a no-brainer, A civillian is a civillian, they cannot be charged for the military law of an organisation they arent even part of. They however by being part of, in this example a mutiny, can be charged with Conspiracy/Solicitation/Attempt/Accessory for battery, maiming, assault, tresspassing, controlled substances, Damage or Destruction of Property, Destruction of a Vessel or Habitat/Terrorism, Rioting, Vandalism,Endangerment, Hooliganism and so forth depending on how bad the mutiny takes off, to say they cannot be charged is plain wrong.
    Civillians are allowed to speak out and support the Magnitkans or Terrans because thats Democracy for you, people all the time protest war and aslong as they do not infringe on constituational rights or behave violently, its okay. thats the most silliest sentence i ever uttered in refrence to a fictional goverment.
    Treason, is used to charge goverment officials who actively worked to sabotage the goverment. Whistleblowers for example. This cannot be applied to random civillians. The only person on the torch that could faintly be trialed for this is the SCGR, as they are the only non-uniform goverment official on the torch.
    "Include execution" To execute a civillian, there has to be a long and dragged out investigation by a civillian LEO agency, in this case the SFP. Not to mention that there is a high likelyhood that 'execution' as a form of punishment is outlawed either federally or locally for civillians, so either way it wouldnt make sense to be done on the Torch.

    Tbh, i dont see where it says line officers cant be trialed, its implied by that screenshot that they can, unless im wrong.

    yes, let the politician handle law. it would give the SCGR more purpose, wich in my oppinion isnt bad not going to lie, but also they are a politican not a lawyer so its questionable if they should be doing this.

    why the fek would this not apply to security, is security just allowed to be shitfaced drunk all of a sudden while handeling weapons?

    it isnt its own charge, but most people RP this anyways.

    I wouldnt abbreviate this any further in the faint off chance this would actually get added.
    Additionally, if this where a thing it could mean that per IC rules, every single Merc/ Raider round would devolve into a shootout. Just because Officers cannot or are affraid to negotiate anything at that point.
    Superiors surrendering materials and so forth without putting up a fight is silly, yes. However they also have to keep in mind that the Torch is far outside of SCG jurisdiction and cannot rely on assistance to arrive in 5 minutes.
    The Torch is unarmed and has a security detachment of 7 people who have to share 3 Energy Carbines.

    This would deffinetly get some use, however as it is right now the General Article is used and fairly effective so too. This wouldnt add or detract much from the flow/RP of the round, in my own experience as a sec-main.
    Last edited: Jun 13, 2021
    Rowtree likes this.
  6. I think the entire point of this being allowed previously and why I think it should be allowed now is that this normal chain of events is pretty hard to have occur when you're 2+ years or so out in deep space. It makes sense that you might as well be able to court martial a civilian for attempting to blow up the engine on the Torch during Code Red instead of having to sabotage your own mission in order to drop him off way back home.

    This isn't for court martials, but for arrests in general. It used to be that a special amount of leeway was given to Line Officers, due to their positions and supposed competence, respect, and the responsibility theoretically handed to them.

    the SCGR has to fulfill both of these roles, I think. A multitasking role, due to us definitely not adding any sort of military law officials onboard.

    SCMJ old wording. Since there was misbehavior as a sentinel as a charge. It's a simple edit to have it apply to security as well.

    Might as well codify it when it's so prevalent.

    To be fair if the merc negotiation consists of "surrender or die" I don't know what they would expect to happen. and yes, part of it is because you cannot rely on assistance. Once you surrender part of your command on the Torch you go without that material or those personnel for a very very long time, so that is why is should be seen as especially grievous.

    This is my same thinking with Fraternization. The SCUJ is so skeletal that honestly I don't think it would do anything but add RP to allow this and Fraternization to just be their own separate charges.