- Reaction score
- 1,639
- Points
- 1,090
Question: is it possible to successfully charge a Class A reservist under Sect 90 for having missed a duty watch?
It is generally accepted wisdom that reserve members are only subject to the CSD under specific circumstances. That being said, I note that QR&O 103.23 does not explicitly mention reserve service in the context of AWOL. In fact, if you read down to sub para (K) on drafting charges, it stats that:
"failing to obey an order of which he ought to have been aware (although misapprehension arising from want of clarity in the order may be ground for excuse)."
I would submit that in order to rely on this principle, one would have to ensure that the member was aware of the duty. Given that Routine Orders are emailed out to everyone, and that there is a requirement under the NDA to acquaint oneself with orders and directives, I propose that you could make a case for AWOL in this instance. Even if the member claimed they did not get the email, they're still bound by the requirement to be aware of the contents of Routine Orders, which are available to them. Provided they're not NES during the period the ROs were promulgated, they're still liable in my mind.
Opinions... thoughts... comments...
QR&O 103.23
It is generally accepted wisdom that reserve members are only subject to the CSD under specific circumstances. That being said, I note that QR&O 103.23 does not explicitly mention reserve service in the context of AWOL. In fact, if you read down to sub para (K) on drafting charges, it stats that:
"failing to obey an order of which he ought to have been aware (although misapprehension arising from want of clarity in the order may be ground for excuse)."
I would submit that in order to rely on this principle, one would have to ensure that the member was aware of the duty. Given that Routine Orders are emailed out to everyone, and that there is a requirement under the NDA to acquaint oneself with orders and directives, I propose that you could make a case for AWOL in this instance. Even if the member claimed they did not get the email, they're still bound by the requirement to be aware of the contents of Routine Orders, which are available to them. Provided they're not NES during the period the ROs were promulgated, they're still liable in my mind.
Opinions... thoughts... comments...
QR&O 103.23