I understand, but it's not based on experience. It's based on a prediction of what might be good in the future.
With respect to civilian oversight and the makeup of the board, the fact that a person has been in the military doesn't disqualify that person from adjudicating on military issues. Do you think that an all-civilian board with no military experience would have enough understanding of order, discipline, and the military ethos to be able to adjudicate properly? The military are held to a different standard.