The commission`s exception permits the use of such evidence in perjury or perjury testimony in which the plea, offer or associated testimony was filed by the accused on the record, under oath and in the presence of counsel. The Commission recognizes that even this limited exception may deter defendants from being fully open and open during oral argument negotiations and may even prevent the enforcement of pleading agreements. However, the Committee considers that it is generally more important to protect the integrity of the judicial process against intentional deception and falsehood. [The Committee does not intend to interpret its language as requiring or encouraging the taking of the oath of the defendant in proceedings relating to the disclosure and acceptance or refusal of an objection agreement.] Rule 11 (e) 6 last sentence is amended to obtain a second derogation from the general rule of non-conformity of the declarations described above. The amendment also allows such a declaration „in any proceeding in which another declaration, made in the course of the same plea or the same ground, has been introduced and where the declaration must be considered fairly at the same time as it“. This amendment is necessary so that, when introducing evidence for statements made in or as a result of a particular means or means, circumstances which are not prohibited by this Rule (e.g. .B.