Originally Posted by FrankSpeaks

perprojustice you are missing the point the oaths should preferably be non-religious and at the very least there be non-religious options. This state is supposed to be non-secular and unfortunately its a long way from that.

Originally Posted by perprojustice

I said it before and I will say it again.
The oath is only a vehicle on which to ground a charge of perjury.

Perjury has to be proven beyond doubt and there has to be very strong evidence even before a charge is laid.

Perjury has to be a wilfull act and had to lend itself to changing the outcome of the case.

Because of the system not just here in Ireland but throughout Europe and the world the oath is a recognised vehicle( important when it comes to extradition and the likes) on which to base the validity of informations written and informations given orally.

A judge is not going to decide on the credibility of a witness on what oath he takes.

The credibility of the witness is based on the accuracy of the information given by that witness to the court.

A witness can be concluded to be "not a credible witness" for various reasons. This does not mean he has committed perjury.

Of course there are some judges sitting who make disasterious judgments that are not based on the facts as put before them and this in itself is a disgrace.

Originally Posted by marmurr1916

That's not what's at issue: witnesses can either swear an oath or affirm.

The thread is about the oath that all judges are constitutionally obliged to take before they can take office.

That oath is a religious oath and is compulsory for anyone wishing to become a judge in Ireland.