Editing Nuremberg principles (section)

=== Principle IV ===
{{Main|Superior orders}}
{{blockquote|The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him.}}

This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say 'I was just following my superior's orders'".

Previous to the time of the [[Nuremberg Trials]], this excuse was known in common parlance as "[[superior orders]]".{{citation needed|date=February 2019}} After the prominent, high-profile event of the Nuremberg Trials, that excuse is now referred to by many as the "[[Nuremberg Defense]]".  In recent times, a third term, "[[lawful orders]]" has become common parlance for some people.{{citation needed|date=February 2019}} All three terms are in use today, and they all have slightly different nuances of meaning, depending on the context in which they are used.

Nuremberg Principle IV is legally supported by the [[jurisprudence]] found in [[Conscientious objector#Universal Declaration of Human Rights|certain articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which deal indirectly with conscientious objection]].{{citation needed|date=February 2019}} It is also supported by [[Conscientious objector#Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status|the principles found in paragraph 171 of the Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status]] which was issued by the Office of the [[United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees]] (UNHCR). Those principles deal with the conditions under which [[conscientious objector]]s can apply for refugee status in another country if they face persecution in their own country for refusing to participate in an illegal war.