This article is part of a comprehensive series covering the punitive articles of the UCMJ (Uniform Code of Military Justice). It is intended for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Service members facing any UCMJ charge should consult a qualified military defense attorney.
Individual misconduct is the focus of most UCMJ articles. Article 116 (10 U.S.C. § 916) addresses something different: collective disorder. When three or more service members act together in a violent or turbulent disturbance of the peace, the offense shifts from individual bad behavior to a breakdown of the collective discipline that military organizations depend on.
The distinction matters because the military’s effectiveness rests on the premise that individuals follow lawful authority rather than crowd dynamics. A single service member who punches a wall in a barracks is destructive. Three service members who join together in a violent disturbance create a contagion effect that threatens the command structure itself. Article 116 treats that collective dimension as its own category of harm.
Two Offenses: Riot and Breach of Peace
The MCM 2024 (Part IV, Paragraph 68) separates Article 116 into two distinct offenses.
Riot
The accused was a member of an assembly of three or more persons, the assembly caused a violent or turbulent disturbance of the peace, and the accused joined in the disturbance. A riot under the UCMJ tracks civilian riot statutes in its basic structure: a group of at least three, acting together, creating a violent disturbance. The key element is participation. Mere presence at the scene of a riot doesn’t satisfy the elements. The accused must have actively joined in the disturbance, contributing to the violence or turbulence rather than simply being caught in the vicinity.
“Violent or turbulent disturbance of the peace” requires more than loud or disorderly behavior. The disturbance must involve physical violence, threats of violence, or conduct so turbulent that it creates an immediate risk of violence. A group of service members arguing loudly in a barracks hallway probably isn’t a riot. The same group throwing furniture and threatening others probably is. The line falls where turbulence crosses into violence or imminent violence.
Breach of peace
The accused caused or participated in a breach of the peace. Unlike riot, breach of peace has no minimum number of participants. A single service member can commit this offense. The MCM defines breach of peace as an unlawful disturbance of the peace by an outrage upon the senses of decency or morals, or a violent or turbulent disturbance of the peace. The standard is broader than riot: any unlawful conduct that disturbs the peace of a military community qualifies.
In practice, breach of peace charges cover a wide range of disorderly conduct: loud altercations in barracks, public drunkenness that disturbs others, fighting in common areas, and other conduct that disrupts the orderly functioning of a military community. The offense doesn’t require violence. Conduct that outrages “the senses of decency or morals” can constitute a breach of peace even without physical disturbance.
The Collective Dimension: Why Riot Is Different
The UCMJ treats group disorder more seriously than individual disorder for a reason rooted in military organizational theory. A single service member who becomes violent can be physically restrained and disciplinarily processed. Three or more service members acting together in violence create a situation that may exceed the immediate control capacity of the chain of command, particularly in environments where weapons are accessible and training in their use is universal.
Historical precedent reinforces this concern. Incidents of collective disorder at military installations have demonstrated that group violence in a military population carries risks qualitatively different from civilian disturbances, because the participants are trained in the use of force and may have access to military weapons.
Article 94 (Mutiny and Sedition) addresses the most extreme form of collective military disorder: organized refusal to obey orders or organized violent resistance to lawful authority. Article 116 sits below Article 94 on the severity spectrum, covering collective violence that doesn’t rise to the level of organized resistance to authority but that still represents a breakdown in discipline that the military cannot tolerate.
Punishment and Cross-References
For riot: dishonorable discharge, forfeiture of all pay and allowances, and ten years’ confinement. For breach of peace: confinement for six months and forfeiture of two-thirds pay per month for six months, with no punitive discharge.
The ten-year maximum for riot is among the highest for any non-violent-against-persons offense in the UCMJ. The severity reflects the military’s institutional judgment about the danger of collective disorder: even when no one is seriously injured, the precedent of service members joining together in violent defiance of order threatens the disciplinary foundation that military operations depend on.
Breach of peace, with its significantly lower maximum and no discharge authority, reflects the offense’s nature as a catch-all for disorderly conduct that doesn’t rise to the severity of the specifically enumerated offenses. Article 134 (General Article) can also reach disorderly conduct through its “prejudice to good order and discipline” clause, giving prosecutors flexibility in selecting the appropriate charging vehicle.
This is the fiftieth and final article in this series. It ends with the offense that addresses collective breakdown, fitting because every article covered in this series shares a common foundation: the military functions because individuals subordinate personal impulses to organizational requirements. When that subordination fails individually, specific articles address the misconduct. When it fails collectively, Article 116 treats the group dynamic itself as an aggravating factor. The collective nature of riot elevates the offense beyond what any single participant would face alone, because the military recognizes that disorder that spreads is categorically more dangerous than disorder that stays contained.
Joseph L. Jordan, Attorney at Law: Article 116 covers two offenses related to collective disorder: riot, requiring three or more persons acting together in a violent or turbulent disturbance, and breach of peace, covering individual conduct that disrupts the public tranquility. Riot carries significantly harsher punishment than breach of peace.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. No attorney-client relationship is created by reading this content. If you are facing charges under the UCMJ or need legal guidance regarding military justice matters, consult a qualified military defense attorney.