The right to conscientific objection versus the duty to swear in Colombia

Abstract

Conscientious objection is a widely studied topic, therefore, within the constitutional literature various analytical expressions of this topic can be identified, especially in foreign ones. Developed countries spend their efforts analyzing and evaluating the most appropriate way to implement this valuable right; However, in-depth analysis and doctrinal approaches to this topic are scarce in our country. Specifically in Colombia, the necessary regulatory amendment has not been analyzed in order to achieve that, in specific cases, conscientious objection against the duty to swear as a requirement of validity of certain procedural acts, does not lead to the invalidation of said procedural action. The purpose of this academic text is to specify the situations constituting invalidity of procedural acts due to lack of oath, to analyze the jurisprudential and doctrinal position in Colombia against the objections that procedural subjects would eventually make to swear, and to propose a legal proposal to draw a way of validity of the procedural acts that require
an oath in Colombia, even though conscientious objection is alleged against this requirement.