Men may soon get the chance to take off their jackets in the courts. Photo: Chris Sant FournierMen may soon get the chance to take off their jackets in the courts. Photo: Chris Sant Fournier

Men could be spared from wearing the obligatory jacket in court in summer if a proposal by the Justice Reform Commission goes through.

The commission feels that a shirt and a tie should suffice in the hot summer months.

The proposal will require changes to a legal notice governing behaviour in court. Legal Notice 279 of 2008 includes other provisions too, such as banning photographs, use of mobile phones and smoking inside the courthouse.

Although the rules do not spell out what sort of attire men have to wear in court, it says they should be appropriately dressed.

All courtrooms have air conditioners nowadays but the corridors, where plaintiffs, defendants, witnesses and court experts wait till they are called inside, remain stifled and hot.

All cases are given an appointment at 9am, meaning there can be some waiting time until a case is heard.

Although the rules do not spell out what sort of attire men have to wear in court, it says they should be appropriately dressed

The Justice Reform Commission, which earlier this week submitted its second report containing almost 300 recommendations, is suggesting that more seating be provided in the law courts’ corridors. There should also be water dispensers. The commission also mentions a canteen.

It also suggested the setting up of a proper customer care section to handle queries by the people.

The dress code in court has always been a controversial subject. In 2008, a legal notice laying down the dress code for female lawyers was amended soon after it was labelled as discriminatory.

It laid down that “advocates... shall wear a dark blue, charcoal grey or black suit or pin-striped trousers and black jacket, a white shirt with a black, grey or white tie or bow-tie and black gown. Lady advocates... shall wear black or blue or charcoal grey suits, or a white blouse and a black skirt under a black gown.”

There was no mention of trousers, sparking controversy. The legal notice was soon amended to include the words “or trousers”.

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.