Hong Kong's judicial wigs: an outdated colonial symbol that should be discarded
The article argues that judicial wigs, a remnant of British colonial rule, are inappropriate for modern Hong Kong. It notes that British influence persists in Hong Kong after 150 years of colonization, particularly through English common law. The author calls for removing such colonial symbols from Hong Kong's legal system.
The tradition originated in 17th-century England under Charles II and spread through imperial expansion. Several former British territories have already abolished it, including Singapore in the 1990s, South Africa after apartheid, and Ireland in 2011.
The letter highlights practical discomfort in Hong Kong's subtropical climate, noting lawyers juggling cases in heavy robes and non-breathable wigs. It also cites Article 10 of the Bill of Rights Ordinance, arguing that wigs act as class markers that alienate clients, potentially hindering communication and harming legal outcomes.
Removing wigs could enhance comfort for legal professionals and reduce perceived class barriers, potentially improving client-lawyer trust and communication, especially for indigent defendants. It may also align the judiciary with modern societal norms and the principle of equality enshrined in local law. However, the change is largely symbolic; it may not alter substantive legal practice, though it could influence public perception of the system's fairness and modernity.