Legal Wear History...
The following stories are extracts from various sources found on internet
Wigs & Gowns. A lasting tradition. Victorian Law Foundation
Contemporary Issues
Court dress came under particular scrutiny in Australia in the 1970s when the Family Court was established. In an attempt to make this court less formal and more 'family friendly', it was proposed that wigs should not be worn, although the gowns would be retained. However, in 1987, after a series of violent attacks directed against judicial members of the Family Court, judge’s wigs were reinstated to preserve the legal practitioners' anonymity in the court.
Today, the practice of wearing wigs and gowns remains a matter of significant social and political debate.
Some Arguments for Retaining Court Dress:
- People associate wigs and gowns with the law and its administrators. Like other uniforms, wigs and gowns serve to represent the law as an entity rather than as a group of individuals.
- Court dress is an equaliser. Because everyone looks the same, there can be no discrimination based on clothing.
- Court dress inspires respect for the law and its practitioners.
- Legal attire can provide the wearer with some anonymity.
Some Arguments for Abolishing Court Dress
- Wigs and gowns form part of an archaic historical tradition that might indicate outdated attitudes.
- They are impractical in the Australian climate, as they are hot and uncomfortable to wear.
- Court dress can appear alienating to members of the public.
An ongoing argument
Despite vocal opposition to court dress from some sections of society, opinion polls from both the public and the legal profession continue to support the retention of wigs and gowns. The most recent public opinion survey conducted by the Law Institute of Victoria in 2003 reported that 54 percent (193) of a total 360 respondents agreed with maintaining legal regalia.
