Ineficacia del juramento procesal como garantía de la verdad dentro de un Estado laico.

Abstract

The main objective of this thesis is to analyze whether the oath, within judicial proceedings, and more specifically as a component for the proper assessment of evidence, is necessary in a secular state or, on the contrary, is a practice that is currently superfluous, unnecessary and contrary to constitutionally protected rights. For this purpose, two chapters will be developed where the first one will be destined to understand what the oath is and where it came from, examining its historical background, its conceptualization and the types of oaths that exist in the legal field. In the second chapter, the possibility of the oath being contrary to certain constitutionally protected rights will be examined, the role of the oath within the evidentiary assessment will be analyzed and the problem to be solved will be addressed. Finally, conclusions and recommendations will be presented in relation to what has been discussed throughout the document. In order to achieve the proposed objectives, information from doctrine, jurisprudence, national and comparative legislation will be used in order to achieve a research work of excellence.