THE PROTECTIVE FUNCTION OF THE OATH AND ITS RELATION TO THE SECURITY FUNCTION

Abstract

The article highlights existing views on the functions of an oath and points out the lack of consensus on this issue among the scientific community. It is noted that the functions are capable of reflecting the qualitative uniqueness and demand for an oath as a legal phenomenon in the legal system of society. The functions of the oath have been highlighted. It has been noted that some researchers try to present their classification as a multifunctional system, while others adhere to a bifunctional approach, according to which oaths have only one function. It is emphasized that clarifying the role and purpose of the oath in the conditions of modern reality provides grounds for supplementing the existing list of functions with a protective function. It has been established that, on the one hand, taking an oath through appropriate means of ensuring conscious awareness of the need to comply with it by officials contributes to preventing violations in the field of public administration, and on the other hand, it is reinforced by the imposition of legal responsibility for its violation. In other words, its goal is to protect the subjective rights of those who take the oath, namely citizens of Ukraine. It is noted that while oath norms are not secure in their functional orientation, they still possess such a property. It has been established that the protective function of the oath can be fulfilled in cases where within the scope of the security function of the oath, it wasʼt possible to ensure the necessary behavior of the official of the public administration and the citizen believes that such improper behavior of the official violated his rights, forcing him to seek protection. Defined ways of protecting the violated rights, legitimate interests, or freedoms of citizens include administrative appeal, which may result in the restoration of violated values, application of disciplinary measures to individuals responsible for the violation, and recourse to the court. Self-defense isnʼt also excluded in a manner that isnʼt prohibited by law and doesnʼt contradict the moral principles of society. It has been clarified that despite the existing connection between the protective and security functions of the oath, they should be distinguished as each is aimed at achieving different goals.