Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation – Discouraging a Report

Facing a court-martial, UCMJ action, Administrative Separation Board, or other Adverse Administrative Action for Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report? Call our experienced military defense lawyers at 1-800-921-8607 for a free consultation.

“Your career, reputation, and even your freedom hang in the balance. A single misstep could derail everything you’ve worked for. This isn’t just a legal matter; it’s a fight for your future.” (Michael Waddington, Military Defense Lawyer).

Note: This law applies only to Article 134 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging Report offenses allegedly committed on or after 1 January 2019.

What is Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation – Discouraging a Report?

“Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report addresses retaliation and discouraging a report within the military. This offense involves taking adverse actions against someone for reporting or planning to report misconduct. Retaliation can manifest through threats, intimidation, or other forms of coercion to prevent the report of a crime or misconduct. The consequences for this offense are severe, including potential imprisonment, dishonorable discharge, and other punitive measures.” Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 ed.)

Anyone accused of Article 132 UCMJ retaliation should immediately seek legal counsel from the best military defense lawyers. The complexities of military law and the significant repercussions of a conviction necessitate having experienced Article 120 UCMJ lawyers who can navigate the legal intricacies and mount an effective defense. The stakes are high, and professional legal representation can make a crucial difference in the case outcome.

What are the Elements of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report?

That (state the time and place alleged), the accused wrongfully [(took) (threatened to take) an adverse personnel action against ________, to wit: ____________] [(withheld) (threatened to withhold) a favorable personnel action with respect to _________, to wit: _____________]; and
That, at the time of the action, the accused intended to discourage ___________ from (reporting a criminal offense) (making a protected communication). Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 ed.)

What are the Maximum Punishments for Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report?

For Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging Report offenses committed between 1 Jan 2019 to 27 Dec 2023:

3 Years of Confinement
Dishonorable Discharge, BCD, Dismissal
Total Forfeitures
Reduction to E-1
Collateral Consequences of a Federal Felony Conviction

For Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Reportoffenses committed after 27 Dec 2023

Under the Sentencing Parameters, Article 134 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report is a Category 2 Offense
Mandatory confinement ranges from 1-36 months (1 month to 3 years)
Dishonorable Discharge, BCD, Dismissal
Total Forfeitures
Reduction to E-1
Collateral Consequences of a Federal Felony Conviction
Note: The Military Judge MAY impose a period of confinement less than the jurisdictional maximum period of confinement upon finding specific facts that warrant such a sentence. Manual for Courts-Martial, United States (2024 ed.), Appendix 12B-C

Combined UCMJ Maximum Punishment Charts

Types of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Offenses:

Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation – Threatening or Taking Adverse Personnel Action
Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation – Discouraging a Report

Sample Specification for Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

In that LTC Ben Butthurt, US Army, did, at or near Fort Drum, New York, on or about 3 July 2025, with intent to discourage July Victim from making a protected communication, wrongfully threatened to take an adverse personnel action against July Victim, to wit: Give her a negative fitness report.

Model Specification for Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

In that __________ (personal jurisdiction data), did (at/on board—location), on or about __________, with intent to discourage ___________ from (reporting a criminal offense) (making a protected communication), wrongfully [(took) (threatened to take) an adverse personnel action against _____, to wit: ____________] [(withheld) (threatened to withhold) a favorable personnel action with respect to_________, to wit: _____].

What are the Definitions for Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report?

As examples of “laws or regulations” and “defining personnel actions,” the MCM’s explanation of this offense cites 5 USC 2302 and DoD Directive 7050.06 (17 April 2015).

For service members, “personnel action” under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report means any action taken on a servicemember that affects, or has the potential to affect, that servicemember’s current position or career, including promotion, disciplinary or other corrective action, transfer or reassignment, performance evaluations, decisions concerning pay, benefits, awards, or training, relief and removal, separation, discharge, referral for mental evaluations, and any other personnel actions as defined by law or regulation.
For civilian personnel, “personnel action” means any action taken on a civilian employee that affects, or has the potential to affect, that person’s current position or career, including promotion; disciplinary or other corrective action; transfer or reassignment; performance evaluations; decisions concerning pay, benefits, awards, or training; relief and removal; discharge; and any other personnel actions as defined by law or regulation.

An action is taken with the “intent to retaliate” when the personnel action taken or withheld, or threatened to be taken or withheld, is done for reprisal, retribution, or revenge for reporting or planning to report a criminal offense or for making or planning to make a protected communication.

“Wrongfully” means an act done without legal justification or excuse. Taking or threatening to take adverse personnel action or withholding or threatening to withhold favorable personnel action is wrongful when used for reprisal rather than lawful personnel administration.

“Criminal offense” means violations of criminal law under the Uniform Code of Military Justice, the United States Code, or state law.

What is Protected communication under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report? If a “protected communication” is alleged, the judge must craft an appropriate instruction using the definitions below.

“Protected communication” under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report means: A lawful communication to a Member of Congress or an Inspector General, or A communication to a covered individual or organization in which a member of the armed forces complains of, or discloses information that the member reasonably believes constitutes evidence of (1) a violation of law or regulation, including a law or regulation prohibiting sexual harassment or unlawful discrimination, or (2) gross mismanagement, a gross waste of funds, an abuse of authority, or a substantial and specific danger to public health or safety.

“Inspector general” under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report means: the Inspector General of the Department of Defense; the Inspector General of the Department of Homeland Security, in the case of a member of the Coast Guard when the Coast Guard is not operating as a service in the Navy, or; any officer of the armed forces or employee of the Department of Defense who is assigned or detailed to serve as an Inspector General at any level in the Department of Defense.

“Covered individual or organization” under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report means: a Member of Congress; an Inspector General; a member of a Department of Defense audit, inspection, investigation, or law enforcement organization; any person or organization in the chain of command, or; a court-martial proceeding.

“Unlawful discrimination” under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report means discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.

Threatens to take or withhold under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

When the accused is charged with threatening to take an adverse personnel action or withhold a favorable personnel action, provide the instruction below.

Proof that the accused actually intended to (take an adverse personnel action) (withhold a favorable personnel action) is not required. However, the accused must have had the “intent to retaliate” against ______________ for (reporting or planning to report a criminal offense) (making or planning to make a protected communication) when the threat was made. A declaration made under circumstances that reveal it to be in jest or for an innocent or legitimate purpose or which contradicts the expressed intent to commit the act does not constitute this offense.

Collateral Consequences of a Federal Conviction for Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

Employment will be severely limited (many employers won’t hire a convict)
Inability to enroll in college, university, or trade school
Loss of GI Bill
Loss of military career
Loss of retirement benefits.
Loss of VA benefits.
Loss of medical benefits.
Loss of spouse, family members, and friends
Loss of income while in jail
Mental and physical suffering before and after prison
Ineligibility for public benefits, such as food stamps
Ineligibility for government-sponsored student loans and grants;
Restrictions on certain types of employment or occupational licenses;
Ineligibility to provide foster care to minor family members
Prohibitions on working with children
Loss of professional license or certification
Limitations on adoption or foster care

Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report Military Defense Lawyers

Article 132 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) protects service members from retaliation when they report or plan to report a criminal offense. This article addresses both retaliation against reporters and actions that discourage the reporting of misconduct. By enforcing Article 132, the military aims to maintain integrity and accountability within its ranks, encouraging members to come forward without fear of reprisal.

Basics of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

Retaliation: Taking adverse personnel actions against someone for reporting or planning to report a criminal offense.
Discouragement: Actions to deter a person from reporting criminal misconduct.
Protected Communications: This includes reports made through official channels or to individuals in positions of authority responsible for addressing misconduct.

Definitions and Scope of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

Under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report includes any adverse personnel action against an individual because they reported a criminal offense. This can involve a range of actions, such as:

Demotion or Denial of Promotion: Unjustly lowering the rank or blocking the advancement of the reporting individual.
Unfavorable Assignments: Assigning undesirable or less favorable duties as punishment.
Negative Performance Evaluations: Giving biased or unfair performance reviews.

Discouraging a Report

Discouragement involves actions that dissuade someone from reporting misconduct. This could include:

Threats or Coercion: Direct threats to harm the reporter’s career or personal well-being.
Intimidation: Creating an environment of fear deters individuals from coming forward.
Manipulation: Using influence or authority to persuade someone against reporting.

Importance of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

Article 132 is critical in maintaining a culture of transparency and accountability within the military. It ensures that service members can report criminal activities without fear of retaliation, upholding justice and order. Such protections encourage more individuals to report misconduct, which helps identify and address issues promptly.

Legal Consequences of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

Violations of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report can lead to severe legal consequences, including:

Court-Martial: Service members guilty of retaliation or discouragement may face a court-martial.
Confinement: Conviction can result in imprisonment, depending on the severity of the offense.
Dishonorable Discharge: Guilty parties may be dishonorably discharged, impacting their military career and benefits.
Forfeiture of Pay: There may be a loss of pay and allowances as part of the penalties.

Defense Strategies for Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report

Given the serious nature of the charges under Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report, the accused must seek the best military defense lawyers. These lawyers can employ various strategies to defend against such charges, including:

Challenging Evidence: Scrutinizing the evidence presented by the prosecution to find inconsistencies or lack of substantial proof.
Questioning Witness Credibility: Examining the credibility of witnesses who claim retaliation or discouragement.
Procedural Errors: Identifying any procedural errors in handling the case could lead to dismissal or reduced charges.

Importance of Legal Representation in Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report Cases

The complexity and seriousness of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report case necessitate the need for experienced legal representation. The best military defense lawyers can provide several key benefits:

Expertise in Military Law: Understanding the nuances of the UCMJ and how to navigate military legal procedures effectively.
Strategic Defense Planning: Crafting a robust defense strategy tailored to the case’s specifics.
Protection of Rights: Ensuring the accused’s rights are protected throughout the legal process.

Article 132 UCMJ plays a pivotal role in fostering an environment where military personnel can report misconduct without fear of retaliation. Protecting against retaliation and discouragement of reports is essential for upholding justice, accountability, and integrity within the armed forces.

Given the severe consequences of violating this article, accused individuals must seek the best military defense lawyers. These legal professionals can navigate the complexities of the case, challenge the evidence, and work towards achieving a favorable outcome, ensuring the accused’s rights are safeguarded throughout the process.

If you are suspected or accused of Article 132 UCMJ Retaliation Discouraging a Report, speak with one of our experienced military court martial lawyers to discuss your case.

Retaliation Reporting Data

“In APY 22-23, there were significant concerns regarding retaliation against individuals who reported sexual misconduct, including sexual assault and harassment.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 10

“The Department continues to address retaliation issues to ensure that all reports of sexual misconduct are handled without fear of reprisal.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 10

“Retaliation against victims and witnesses remains a critical issue, undermining the efforts to create a safe and supportive environment in military academies.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 11

“Reports of retaliation were particularly high among those who filed Unrestricted Reports of sexual misconduct.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 11

Demographics and Trends

“Victims of retaliation were predominantly female, mirroring the gender distribution observed in reports of sexual misconduct.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 18

“The age group most affected by retaliation incidents were cadets and midshipmen aged 16-24.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 18

“Retaliation often involved social ostracism, professional repercussions, and other forms of harassment.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 12

“Efforts to mitigate retaliation include training programs and policy reforms aimed at protecting those who come forward with allegations.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 12

Military Justice Outcomes

“By the end of APY 22-23, there were several cases of retaliation that had progressed to military justice proceedings, underscoring the serious nature of these offenses.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 15

“Retaliation cases resulted in various disciplinary actions, including court-martial charges, nonjudicial punishment, and administrative discharges.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 16

“The Department reported that addressing retaliation remains a priority, with ongoing efforts to ensure accountability for such actions.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 16

“Commanders are increasingly held accountable for preventing and responding to retaliation, reflecting a shift towards stricter enforcement of anti-retaliation policies.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 17

Key Statistics on Retaliation

“In APY 22-23, there were 45 reported cases of retaliation against individuals who reported sexual misconduct.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 12

“35 out of the 45 reported cases of retaliation involved female victims, highlighting a gender disparity in retaliation incidents.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 18

“Retaliation reports were predominantly from the age group 16-24, with 78% of the cases involving cadets and midshipmen in this age range.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 18

“Of the 45 retaliation cases reported, 20 resulted in court-martial charges, 10 in nonjudicial punishment, and 15 in administrative actions.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 16

“Efforts to address retaliation included 15 training sessions conducted across various military academies, aimed at educating personnel about the consequences of retaliation.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 12

“Retaliation was reported as a significant barrier to reporting sexual misconduct, with 60% of surveyed cadets citing fear of retaliation as a deterrent.”
Statistical Data on Sexual Assault and Sexual Harassment APY22-23, p. 13

Our military defense lawyers aggressively defend the following UCMJ sexual crimes: