What can a member elect if they refuse NJP while ashore?

When a member elected to refuse Non-Judicial Punishment (NJP) while ashore, they effectively exercise their right to request a court-martial instead. This choice is significant as NJP is an informal process meant to handle minor offenses where the member can accept punishment from a commanding officer without the stigma of a formal court-martial record. By opting for a court-martial, the member is choosing to face potentially more serious consequences associated with a formal legal proceeding, which includes a jury of peers and greater legal rights, but also the possibility of harsher penalties if found guilty.

Choosing court-martial allows the member to formally contest the charges against them, rather than accepting the outcomes prescribed under NJP. This decision highlights the member's right to defend against accusations, reflecting a procedural safeguard within military justice.

The other options are not applicable in this context. A guilty plea typically pertains to accepting responsibility in a court setting, while discharge refers to separation from service, which is not a direct outcome of refusing NJP. Extra duty, although a potential punishment under NJP, does not apply since it’s a part of consequences under NJP rather than an alternative path following the refusal.