In 1945 and 1946, during the Nuremberg trials the issue of superior orders again arose. Before the end of World War II, the Allies suspected such a defense might be employed and issued the London Charter of the International Military Tribunal (IMT), which explicitly stated that following an unlawful order is not a valid defense against charges of war crimes.
The court here argued that a death camp is a war crime and the superior order defense is inapplicable.
I don't necessarily agree with this. It really has to do with where you are in the hierarchy in the scope of your duties. Generals might be in a position to dispute unlawful orders, but it's highly unlikely that someone assigned to a concentration camp as a guard could simply refuse to perform those duties without consequence.
Quick Wikipedia reference:
The court here argued that a death camp is a war crime and the superior order defense is inapplicable.
I don't necessarily agree with this. It really has to do with where you are in the hierarchy in the scope of your duties. Generals might be in a position to dispute unlawful orders, but it's highly unlikely that someone assigned to a concentration camp as a guard could simply refuse to perform those duties without consequence.
"guard them or join them"