IndexWhat is meant by "discipline"?Why does an army need a concept like "discipline"?ConclusionBibliographyWhat is meant by "discipline"?The term "discipline" has a wide range of meanings when considered with armed troops. According to Frank Burns “without discipline the army would be just a group of boys wearing the same color clothes”. This quote reveals the importance of discipline when it comes to armed troops. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get Original Essay According to the Collins dictionary meaning, “discipline” is the quality of being able to behave and work in a controlled manner that involves obedience to particular rules or standards. As the definition states, members must adhere to the rules and regulations imposed by the particular organization they are a part of in order to maintain the organization's existing disciplinary system. In the Cambridge Dictionary the meaning of the term "discipline" was expressed as "training which makes people more willing to obey or more able to control themselves, often in the form of rules and punishments if these are broken, or the behavior produced by this training" According to its meaning, discipline is a possibility given by authorities to members to control their behavior through the tasks to which they are aligned. Why does an army need a concept like "discipline"? Army is complete only if there is discipline among them. By the middle of the 18th century the British army also faced the challenge of tarnishing the reputation of the armed forces by its soldiers and officers armed forces tended to commit the crimes of “desertion” and “mutiny.” [As they were subjected to constant wars and conflicts, their minds were in a phase of seeking relief from these and returning to their loved ones. Crimes such as desertion occurred specifically for this reason. The mutiny occurred because those soldiers were always in the crosshairs of wars and conflicts. That violent mentality had directly influenced their behaviors.]At the beginning there were no adequately codified disciplinary actions. But when they found that their image was continually being tarnished, legislative bodies created the Crimes and Punishments sections of the Armed Forces Laws. Since Sri Lanka is also following the content of the British Army Act, Sri Lanka also has similar chapters for military offenses and their punishments. Part Ⅻ of the Army Law considers military crimes and punishments should be imposed in a particular way. [The crimes committed by soldiers and officers, as well as their punishments, are important factors when studying discipline since the concept of discipline is built on these pillars. While crimes violate discipline, punishments serve to restructure the gap created. Therefore, both crimes and their punishments are important for a study conducted on “Discipline”. ]The Army Law mentions the crime of "disobedience to superior officers" as one of the most common crimes among soldiers. If a person ruling under military law disobeys his superior officer while discharging his duties, such person shall be punished with any severe punishment mentioned in section 133. This offense will seriously damage the disciplinary order of the armed forces because if one does not obey the superior, others will also be influenced and therefore soldiers will act according to their commands. [In this context, disobedience means willfully ignoring the commands givenorally or in writing or by signals or otherwise.] [This will be immensely affected while armed troops are on active duty in a war situation. If ilif soldiers do not comply with the orders of their superior, it will directly affect the final outcome of the war and this will lead to a threat focused on state security. Meanwhile, this will affect the society's perspective towards the task of the armed forces and damage the society's faith towards the armed forces.]In the case of Chandrasena v. Commander of the Sri Lanka Army and others, the accused was charged with two offenses mentioned in the Army Act. One is conduct “prejudicial to good order and military discipline” under section 102(1). This type of crime committed by any member of the armed forces will create a huge discussion in the entire society, as the perspective towards the armed forces is a sensitive factor that also directly affects the national security of a state. [Article 102(1) focuses on disobedience of armed forces personnel towards the garrison and other orders given by higher authorities. This Garrison and other orders contain standing orders, movement orders, and tours of duty that are issued from time to time as the need arises. If a soldier does not obey any movement order given to him while on active duty in a time of war, it will affect the final outcome of the war. Under movement orders, if a soldier requests to report to a certain place at a certain time, he must be there at the time he was ordered as he must comply with carrying out any lawful order given to him as an army order while he is engaged in war or otherwise on regular service.] According to section 103 of the Army Act, one of the most common offenses is "Desertion", which may be considered a somewhat dire situation when one considers the reputation of the Army. More soldiers than officers commit the crime of desertion. The terrible situation that can arise due to desertion will be the civil crimes committed by people abandoned by the armed forces. Even though people appreciate and trust what the military has done in wartime and other conflict situations, as well as in natural disasters, once a member of the military has committed a single crime, they are used to attribute blame the army as a whole. [More recently, some serious civil crimes such as murder, rape, robbery, as well as attempted and suicide with weapons have been committed by abandoned people of armed people. Furthermore, some of these defected armed forces members are used to commit other serious crimes such as drug trafficking and drug distribution.]In particular, defected persons who illegally possess their weapons more often commit serious crimes such as murders which are punishable according to general criminal law. the courts too. Furthermore, they can also commit suicide with weapons. If such persons are caught while attempting to commit suicide, then they are liable for the crime of “Dueling and Attempting Suicide” under section 127 of the Army Act. [In such situations the soldiers or officers are responsible for various crimes such as desertion, illegal possession of army weapons, absence without leave as well as crimes such as murder.] [If a person subject to military law fights, promotes, involves or connives in a fight or in a suicide attempt then for officers the maximum punishment will be cashier while for soldiers rigorous or simple imprisonment. Even for suicide attempts the courts impose penal deductions equal to the cost of treatment.] Pursuant to the article104(1) the crime of "fraudulent recruitment" is mentioned. This crime can be considered, to some extent, a threat to national security. In this context, anyone can provide the relevant documents using fraudulent data in order to be recruited into the Army. Based on contemporary security issues experienced across the world, even if such fraudulent enlistment takes place, terrorists, deserters from foreign armies and criminals may be recruited into the army. [Fraudulent enlistment can be committed by providing illegal documents drawn up according to the requirements for selection into the armed forces. For example, birth certificates, other certificates required on educational qualifications can be issued as per the requirements of the armed forces. Furthermore, if the person has previously been discharged from the military, he or she can produce false documents to re-enlist in the military. If the person discharged from the military had committed a serious crime such as murder and could have fraudulently enlisted, then the company may be questioned about such enlistment as it clearly appears to be a threat to the national security of that particular country.] Below In any circumstance, if a terrorist could join an armed force, the most sensitive security secrets could be passed on to rebels or other foreign states through that person. For this reason, such people should be given severe punishments to prevent further enlistments that may occur. Furthermore, the punishment must necessarily be proportionate to the crime committed. The punishment cannot be sufficiently severe or insufficient in relation to the crime committed. [If an enemy state becomes aware of such sensitive security secrets, it would pose a huge threat to the country as the enemies could easily attack them with the information they possess and the country in particular may have no chance to remediate the threats which will be aimed at the security of the State.]In the case of Captain Nawarathna v Major General Sarath Fonseka and 6 others the crime of "scandalous conduct of an officer" and the crime of "conduct prejudicial to military discipline" were taken into consideration. The case arose following the action of a Sri Lankan Army Captain who was subjected to an officer-committed offense which ultimately caused a challenge to the discipline of the Army officers. It involved the refusal of a promise of marriage after having had sexual intercourse with his girlfriend several times, in the context in which he had signed a sworn declaration before the army commander. [The petitioner, a captain in the Sri Lanka Army, was having an affair with his then girlfriend. Their relationship had lasted for more than 10 years and the petitioner had sexual intercourse with her and told her that he will marry her. However, the petitioner refused to marry her and she took the case before the superiors of the petitioner and after explaining the gravity of the act, the petitioner promised to marry his fiancée within 6 months. He later informed that he would not marry her under any circumstances and again the matter was brought to the notice of the superior. After conducting an investigation, they decided that the petitioner is guilty of the offenses committed under sections 107 and 129(1). Then, after transmitting the decision to the Army commander, he ordered the holding of a summary trial. At the trial the appellant declared that he had not received any indictment and that he was not aware of the accusations made against him. At the end of the summary trial, the Court Martial inflicted punishments such as forfeiture of seniority from the 109th degree and dismissal from the army. ]When such cases are reported, the prospect of 2020.