admin
Fidelis Munyoro Chief Court Reporter
The old-fashioned wigs for judges have sparked debate in Zimbabwe on whether local judges should continue wearing bench wigs, 43 years after independence.
Advocates lost their wigs sometime before independence when the branches of lawyers, advocates and attorneys, were fused into a single branch of legal practitioners, with all having the right of speaking for clients in all courts.
The Speaker of Parliament used to wear a similar full-bottomed wig and the clerks wigs similar to those worn by advocates. Both were dumped in the first session of the first Parliament, although the Speaker retains modified robes.
But judges retained their ceremonial full-bottomed wigs, seen at formal events, and their working short wigs when sitting in criminal or civil courts.
At the forefront of the discussion are the judges themselves, a development that has nudged Chief Justice Luke Malaba to constitute a “Judicial Wigs Committee” to see if the ceremonial trappings are still indispensable.
The committee now wants to hear views from the general public before making an appropriate decision.
In a press statement last week, the Judicial Service Commission called for public participation in the debate regarding the wigs.
“There has been an ongoing heated debate worldwide on whether or not both types of judicial wigs, should be retained or removed as part of the official judicial attire and the transformation of the judiciary,” said the JSC.
“These calls have now gained considerable traction and are now echoed in the Zimbabwean judiciary. Honourable judges of the superior courts debated the subject matter at the end of the first term symposium held in April 2022 in Masvingo.”
This, according to the JSC, was the basis that Chief Justice Malaba, constituted the JWC to stir discussions and solicit the views and comments of all stakeholders in the justice delivery system and the public.
“Thus, as a way of promoting inclusivity and democratic governance, the Judicial Wigs Committee wishes to elicit public opinion as part of the concerted efforts to inform and direct public policy on this issue.”
While Zimbabwean judges as part of their garb wear judicial wigs, the ceremonial, worn during occasions such as the official opening of the legal year, and the normal court wigs, worn during ordinary court operations or proceedings, other countries have done away with them describing them as anachronistic and intimidatory.
Ghana, South Africa, Kenya and other Commonwealth countries have quit the wearing of wigs while Britain itself abandoned the century old tradition in 2017.
Veteran lawyer Mr James Mutizwa viewed the wearing of the wigs as outdated, calling for their removal.
“The wigs are now outdated and should go,” he said.
“Judges in chambers do not wear wigs, but a judgment granted in chambers where the judge has no wig is as effectual as one granted by one wearing a wig sitting in open court.”
Social commentator and law student Mr Richard Mahomva lauded the decision to inquire into the wearing of wigs in this modern era, but emphasised that this should go beyond the cosmetic construction of the law.
“It is a welcome initiative which emphasises the decolonisation of the symbol of law making in our country,” he said.
“But this should go deeper into making the law a useful tool for dealing with remnants of imperialism that have kept the majority of African countries alienated from property rights.”
Anyone intending to contribute towards this debate on judicial wigs, the JSC is providing consultation forms or questionnaires from its offices.
Online Reporter