Advocate Sean Templeton of the Mackinnon Stable has proposed the introduction of a single oath for court witnesses, to replace the current options of swearing an oath to God or affirming to tell the truth.

In a letter to The Herald, Templeton argues that the 200 year old practice is anachronistic, and calls for a universal oath to be introduced.

The present oath: "I swear by Almighty God that I will tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth" is, he says, "anachronistic in an ever-changing population."

"There is an ever-increasing number of atheists in Scotland and as such the number of affirmations is increasing in court, particularly noticeable with medical experts. Atheists are forced to either "quietly" swear the oath without any Godly belief or to affirm," he says.

"The problem with affirmation is that it sets a witness out and it instantly draws a great deal of attention to the fact that the person will not swear to God.

"It is a statement relating to a person's personality and belief that no other witness is required to make, unless it is a facet of the particular case. It is impossible to be certain that such an aspect of the witnesses' personality will not affect the views of some jurors as to the quality of their evidence.

"Those holding extremely strong (potentially bigoted) religious views may dismiss everything the witness says in light of their affirmation."

Templeton adds that replacing the bible with alternative boks of faith may create an unnecessary distraction and problem for juries in assessing evidence in any case.

He proposes the use of a universal oath in the following terms: "I swear that I will tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth."

"All witnesses would be on an equal footing and judged accordingly," he says.

Templeton's remarks can be read in full here. The courts are currently closed for the public holiday and could not be contacted for their comments.