A senior Black barrister has called for the white, curly wigs worn in some British courts to be banned as they are 'culturally insensitive'.
Leslie Thomas QC, a barrister at Garden Court Chambers in central London, made his comments after Black barrister Michael Etienne was told he could face disciplinary action if he did not wear his wig to court.
Etienne, who has an afro, wrote to the Bar Council to ask what would happen if he declined to wear his wig and learned that he could be in contempt of court, and be in breach of various clauses of the code of conduct.
The barrister shared the news in a tweet in which he included the hashtag '#HairDiscrimination', and received support from Thomas this week as he told Sky News the wig 'represents and signifies the culturally insensitive climate' at the Bar.
While some see the wigs as a symbol of authority, anonymity and a reminder of the importance of the court, Thomas dismissed branded such arguments as 'nonsense' and noted that a number of Commonwealth countries have stopped the practice and 'justice hasn't collapsed'.
Advert
He commented: 'It's ridiculous, it really is. You need to understand that rationale behind the wig and the rationale behind the wig in the 21st century just does not hold up. If you want to have a uniform, if you want to have that anonymity, if you want to have that distinction between the advocate and the public, you can do that with a respectable gown, with a respectable collar and band.'
Thomas continued: 'It's nonsense, this suggestion that it anonymises you, the wig isn't covering your face it's on top of your head.'
As well as describing the wigs as 'culturally insensitive', Thomas also expressed belief they 'look ridiculous on everyone'.
Advert
He said: 'We wear a wig originally because it was part of 17th century fashion. Where all high members of British society wore wigs. It's anachronistic, based on Caucasian 17th century fashion and it's a throw over which has no place in the 21st century. You asked me about how it impacts Black people, and I would also include people of colour. I think it's culturally insensitive, to have that as part of the necessary uniform to go into court.'
Barristers in Britain began wearing wigs as part of proper court dress in 1685, after Louis XIV of France donned a wig to disguise his hair loss. The trend was adopted by the upper and middle classes across Europe, though in 2007 they stopped being a requirement in family or civil court hearings.
The wigs are still worn during criminal cases, though Thomas noted that judges don't wear wigs in higher courts.
Advert
He expressed belief 'nobody should be wearing this ridiculous costume', and noted that he himself struggles to have a 'wig perching on dreadlocks'.
The barrister added: 'If you have a big afro, it's very difficult to have a wig perching on a big afro. It's just ridiculous.'
Barristers who do not want to wear a wig can apply for special dispensation, and Sam Mercer, the Bar Council's head of equality and diversity, has assured the Bar is open to hearing different views.
Speaking to Sky News, she said: 'We want to hear from barristers so we can fully understand the range of views and experiences within the profession and find the appropriate solution. As an organisation, we remain committed to increasing diversity and inclusion at the Bar.'
Advert
Sikh barristers have been known to be allowed a white turban in the courtroom instead of a wig.
If you have a story you want to tell, send it to UNILAD via [email protected]
Emily Brown