If we are going to do away with tradition on the basis that it is out of date, maybe we ought to get all that drab wood panelling ripped out of the Houses of Parliament and get Ikea in to give the place a facelift while we're at it. We could knock down Buckingham Palace to make way for a skateboarding park and do away with Christmas also - after all - that's over 2000 years old and frightfully out of date. Barristers wear wigs and gowns to provide a degree of anonimity in a sometimes hostile environment where the decisions that affect custody of children, prison sentences and huge sums of people's money are made. Solicitor advocates who are bitter not to have their own legal dress should contact the Law Society for reforms within their own profession rather than trying to erode the traditions of the Bar. Solicitor advocates make a mockery of the Bar and a solicitor's identity crisis should not warrant stripping us of our legal costume because they ticked the LPC box rather than BVC.

Stephanie, Manchester,

The abondoning of whig and gown will have a negative effect. They are externals that symbolise a legal system rather than individuals in it. When these are abandoned authority is lost and decisons made seem personal and biased.
In Australia where these changes have taken place in civil courts and family law courts violence against the legal profession have increased. In the family law courts judges have been murdered and attacked. Why? Because it has been all seen as personal. I believe the family law courts were forced to reintroduce some form of legal attire in order to try and remove the idenification of individuals with rulings made.

Chris, Hobart, Australia

I'm really disappointed to hear that changes to legal dress are being made. I'm a barrister, and I know the dress is expensive, but that is not a reason to abolish it. It represents hundreds of years of tradition, and, as has been recognised by other readers, commands the respect of the public.

The fact that it is unchanged for centuries despite repeated changes in government, policy and the like, is a good symbol of the relationship between the judiciary and the executive.

The dress also renders the advocates a little more anonymous so that its clear to all court users that the advocate is performing a public function (of advocacy), rather than speaking for him/herself.

I'm quite young (29), and otherwise quite liberal, so this is an unusual position for me to take. Well, I look forward to the abolition of the monarchy and the demolition of the palace of westminster to make way for a modern steel/glass megalith.

Thanks Labour.

Jahangir, Buckinghamshire, UK

I have been in the profession for nearly 30 years and this is the latest of our distinct traditions to be abolished. Virtually all legal ceremonial (once an integral part of the admin istration of justice) has been stealthily eroded during that time, which is not in my opinion a good thing. The pomp and circumstance of the law was invaluable for its symbolism of impartiality and continuity through political change. It inspired respect for the rule of law, something that is now on the decline. If there was any evidence that these changes improved the quality of justice I would favour them, but there is none. This is change for its own sake and yet another example of the liberal elite's determination to eradicate all English tradition. These cultural vandals should spend more time in court - in the dock.

James Blair, Buckinghamshire, England

It is folly to get rid of wigs and gowns; they are badges of honour and marks of excellence. The government fails to understand that uniforms are a necessary part of removing the identity of the individual from the performance of the office - it depersonalises something which should be impersonal and objective. Where will this mania for change for change's sake end? Perhaps the Guards would be more comfortable in jeans and T-shirt. Why stop there? I hear the Crown is heavy and uncomfortable. Likewise ties are an unnecessary smartness. Perhaps when we are all wearing "dress down" casual clothes that too will be seen as a uniform and will have to be abolished. It's all very silly.

Todd, London, UK

I am appauled at this continuing dumbing down of our society and traditions. I remember this issue being put to the public by Lord Mackay some years ago. The idea of abolishing traditional legal dress was roundly rejected. Who are these people who feel they can uproot our traditions with impunity? It conveys a sickening arrogance from an Establishment which couldn't give a toss for the people it is supposed to represent.

OH, London, England

I think Mr Pineapples has gone bananas! True while solicitor advocate doesn't necessarily = barrister, many actually are qualified barristers who converted to the otherside by way of hte "Qualified Lawyer's Transfer Test". My boyfriend did and regularly anhiliates barristers who automatically assume he is*just* a solicitor advocate!

I did think that it was a shame wigs and bands were to go, but on reflection, it's probably a good thing. So, many barristers don't favour the chages? I do not know one who likes wearing it... It's also a massive ammount of money to shell out for a junior barrister - I remember my boyfriends wig alone (bought in 2002), cost us £400 we didn't have and meant we had to strugle financially for a long time to recover from the outlay...

Joanne Evans, LONDON, UK

As a criminal barrister practising daily in the Crown Court, I can give direct evidence as to the benefits of wigs and gowns. I am fed up with constant attacks on court dress by people who believe that change must inevitably mean improvement. It most definitely does not. If solicitor advocates want to wear wigs, why don't they become barristers? We are coming to the end of a great era when we had a high-quality, independent criminal bar, which has been destroyed by a foolish Labour Government and by inertia and collusion on the part of the judiciary. Shame on you all.

Robert Buckland, Cardiff , Wales

It is a real shame to see our traditions being kicked into touch in this way. The wig and gown gives an aura to the legal profession in Court and a distinction from the everyday and ordinary.

That the inferior Solicitor "Advocates" should declare that they have the skills and tenacity of those who qualify as Barristers is quite outrageous. How we have let the barbarians into the party Goodness only knows.

Mr Pineapples, Dorset, UK

Abolishing wigs and gowns is a really stupid decision, pushed by the New Labour oligarchy - who seem ashamed of everything that is British. Why do we have to ape everything American? This is change for the sake of change and greyness, reducing the authority of the courts.

A. Abilla, York,

Another step along the path to destroying our world-renowned split legal profession.The lack of distinction between Solicitors and Barristers will potentially end up so blurred that along with proposed regulatory reforms, the legal process will be a commodity- and one weighted in favour of the more financially well-to-do.

Chris, Corfe,

There was a time when "Great Britain" was great we had power, respect, our education was the best, people came from around the world to be educated, learn skills, become better soldiers and officers, etc.etc, now we are second rate and ignored in world affairs, blown up by who ever fancies having a go at us and pomp and ceremony in many aspects of our lives that helped to make us great is to be abolished in the " everyone must look the same and feel equal attitude" that we now live with. Good by " Greatness" for ever.

Terry Leigh, Southend-on-Sea, Essex

As a foreigner, I (and my fellow-citizens) always thought of English legal profession and judiciary as something worth taking example from. Wigs and gowns were a kind of positive external feature of this profession. It is very impressive and commands respect. I do not understand why this government is so keen to sweep away anything that seems old. Even if this "old" works perfectly well. Why barristers and judges of this country should look same as, say, French or Americans? There are no negatives in wigs and gowns, so why not to leave them where they are?

Alex Spak, Aberystwyth, UK

I have worked in the legal profession all my life, to suggest that solicitor-advocates can dress in the robe of the barristers is an insult! In recent years I have rarely seen a wig in the RCJ, and to keep it for the Central Criminal Court is quite right. What a happy day for all those solicitor-advocates who couldn't be bothered to go through the lengthy and difficult process of being called to the Bar, they can all pretend to be something they're not. had they wanted to be barristers they should have qualified as such and not now start being "dressing-up" to cover such inadequacies.

Miss S Harper-Lewis, London, UK

The traditional court dress is liked by defendants and public and provides protection to counsel. It is recognised worldwide as the emblem of the English legal profession.

Abolition of traditions in England has become a way for the Government to appeal to the European and international community. It is unnecessary as it is gradually erroding the identity of an elite profession respected worldwide.

Instead of abolishing court dress there should be a sense of pride about it within the legal system supported by the Lord Chief Justice.

Janan Al-Asady, High Wycombe, UK

Hmm, now all we need are Judges to give sensible decisions, but that might be pushing them a bit too far.

Simon, London, UK

once a tradition is lost it can never be gotten back ... a poorly made decision with scant respect for the wishes of the public and the profession ... very very saddening

Simon Lipert, Hobart, Tasmania

The Law Explored: what to wear in court
Professor Gary Slapper explains the complexities of English law in plain language
Gary Slapper
Gary the dress code some how of the lawyers is black and the upper crust wear the white wig.
I can understand the black suits that mean the D Day but the QC wearing the white wig on top? Is this to scare the victim or show that he is also from the Santa clause family? I am sorry I mean no offence but whenever the criminal is caught the black suit guy walks in and says “Here are the papers of his release. I know that he is vindicated, prejudiced, papers by the press, but I say he is freeman till the court decides he is guilty. . Then trial begins and on it goes the criminal has the time of his life having fun as the lawyer has assured him that the judge is playing golf with him this Saturday.

Firozali A.Mulla MBA PhD, Dar-Es-Salaam , Tanzania