Oaths and affirmations /

For their generous assistance in facilitating the distribution of our electronic survey, ALRI would like to extend special thanks to the Chief Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench, the Chief Judge of the Provincial Court of Alberta, Alberta Justice Court Services and the Canadian Bar Association Alberta Branch. [...] A court will be able to direct that a person must affirm in either of two circumstances: (1) the witness or deponent does not choose between an oath or affirmation, or (2) it is not reasonably practicable, in the opinion of the presiding officer, for the witness or deponent to take an oath in the form or manner appropriate to their religious or other beliefs. [...] However, if a person objects to swearing an oath, they “shall be permitted” to make a solemn affirmation instead.25 The person does not need to justify the objection to the satisfaction of the judge or person administering the procedure. [...] When the statute requires a witness to state a religious objection to the oath before being allowed to affirm, “[t]he implication is that the Legislature prefers the oath to the affirmation. [...] If a witness adheres to a religious doctrine which prescribes an unusual form of oath, which the court is unable to provide, or, if the judge must inquire about the witness’s religious beliefs and about the form of oath which will bind the witness’s conscience, the proceedings will be delayed and the private religious beliefs of the witness will be publicly revealed.