Obeying a direct or indirect order is up to the person to whom the orders are given. For some of us, it can be a very difficult job to obey someone and follow the orders implicitly. Defense services, however, is one such field where it is binding for men/women of junior cadre to follow legal orders coming from their seniors, with no questions asked. Serving and defending a nation by standing guard on the frontiers is by no means an easy job. It requires immense mental strength along with physical agility. A soldier has to endure the harshest of circumstances to survive. Though, breaking down in such scenarios is not unheard of. So what happens if a serviceman decides not to follow a particular order, or fails to perform his duties? Duties or orders can be given to a serviceman through standard operating procedures, treaties, statutes, regulations, lawful orders, etc. The accused will be convicted if found guilty beyond reasonable doubt. Now, an accused can be proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt through various means. This includes testimonials of servicemen in similar position, training manuals and regulations, among other ways. However, this does not apply if the failure in the following of the orders was not a conscious decision. The inability to follow the orders or complete a task may have been due to failure in communication, faulty equipment, or the like. For these and similar reasons, a person cannot be charged with dereliction of duty. Incompetence is a defense against dereliction of duty. A person convicted of dereliction is given a dishonorable discharge from the services. There may also be some jail time involved. If the dereliction has resulted in a major setback in certain operation(s), the person concerned may have to face impeachment or treason charges. During wartime, dereliction can attract capital punishment. If a person is charged for dereliction purely out of spite, or just to make someone accountable for the losses, then, in such a case, the charges levied do not hold ground.