It appears you’re referring to recent considerations being made within English courts about potentially discontinuing the tradition of barristers wearing mandatory wigs. This practice, which dates back to the 17th century, might be changing due to concerns about cultural sensitivity.
These wigs, formally known as perukes, have long been a symbol of authority and learning in the British justice system, however, criticisms do exist. Some people see these wigs as a barrier for non-white people and those from different cultural backgrounds, who could perceive them as a symbol of colonialism and oppression, or simply out of cultural alignment.
There’s also the argument that such traditional garbs, which involve more than just the wig, could be off-putting to the general public, potentially creating a sense of disconnect and intimidation.
However, it’s worth noting that not everyone agrees with this viewpoint, as there are also arguments for the retention of these wearables, for reasons such as maintaining a sense of tradition and providing anonymity for barristers.
As it stands now, there is ongoing debate, but no definitive decision has been made. It’s a topic that involves tradition, practicality, cultural sensitivity, public perception, and much more. As such, it’s ultimately a complex issue with varied opinions.
