{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01263537906137184, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 4.746113989637306, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effectiveness of Law on Oaths and Affirmations in Courts in Tanzania

Justice administration is crucial aspect in any legal system. Production of evidence in courts of law facilitates the justice administration. Often, evidence is tendered through oath or affirmation. Witness will be given option of either to take oath or affirm. Their main difference is that oath is a religious commitment where as an affirmation is non-religious. Taking oath or affirmation is mandatory before taking evidence in the courts. Hence, no unsworn evidence may be taken by the courts of law as matter of principle. The essence of having oath or affirmation before taking evidence is to secure and ensure the witness may speak truth in the court of law about the matter at hand. The oath taking signifies commitment of a witness to depose true facts before the court so as to enable it to administer justice accordingly. Hence, this paper examines the legal issues associated with the oath and affirmations in the court to determine whether it is effective mechanism to ensure courts administer justice based on true evidence.