Obligations under oath-- absolute or ambulatory

Oath-taking is an integral part of my professional life; oaths are used almost as a tool of trade, and are accepted as guarantees of truth. Whilst there is now a statutory right to affirm, instead of to swear, an affirmation itself constitutes a formula, an asseveration to tell the truth. Zeeman J, in the case of R v Mansell decided in 1993, declined to accept evidence on oath from a child aged twelve years because he held inter alia that the child "[had] no notion of the nature or obligation of an oath in the sense that he [had] no understanding of what it is to swear to tell the truth or promising God to tell the truth and has no expectation that God will reward or punish in this world or the next".(1) Whilst His Honour's decision was overturned on appeal, the case demonstrates that oath-taking is fundamental to our legal system and its function in society. It is not only oaths in court proceedings though which are still the subject of debate; oaths of allegiance are also under scrutiny in the context of the so-called Republican debate in this country