mo' nads

My take on Kant's Categorical Imperative (as applied to "right'n'wrong" in the ethical sense);

An individual may believe that a "wrong" action is "right" (and vice-versa), and an individual can certainly know what she'r he believes in regards to an action's "wrongness" or "rightness" (even if such knowledge only indicates uncertainty as to what she'r he believes), but the objective status of the action's "wrongness" or "rightness" remains intact irrespective of such beliefs.

Q1.) Is this a valid interpretation of ethical C.I.? (Why?/Why not?)

Q2.) Is it possible to reconcile such a basis for morality with relativity?