1. One ought to always be honest and one ought to lie to protect the innocent.

there are 2 moral imperatives in this principle.

Since moral imperatives have no truth value, is it technically right to say that the principle is still contradictory?

It seems to me that this principle is self defeating because you simply can not be honest and lie at the same time, it is an impossibility. If you really give it some thought then you would come to realize that you would not need to lie to protect someone who was innocent because the person is innocent a lie would not be needed. So the person being innocent would I would imagin rather you be honest about what 3ever it was that happened to them since they had not commited the problem as they are innocent. You can't lie and be honest at the same time because a lie is not honest at all so somewhere your firing the wrong signals and are not responding in the way that you need to respond in.