知名法官開庭用假髮。 $xx,xxx The wigs serve precisely the same purpose as suits, ties, and all other artiface of the court: to present a level of decorum and respect for the process. This isn't a legal issue, but rather a societal one. That said, the wigs are legally required in many nations (no longer in the US, though they used to), but they're essentially just the dress code of the institution, in the same way that no lawyer would be accepted in court without his or her suit (or equivalent). As Charles Yablon explains: English judicial attire in its present form dates from about 1660, the time of the Restoration of the English monarchy. Upon the return of Charles II from France, the fashion of the Court of Louis XIV for powdered wigs became de rigeur for the smart members of English society. Since England had just emerged from a bloody civil war between those who wore their hair short (the "Roundheads") and those who wore their hair long (the "Beatles"), the pervasive use of wigs was an obvious way to cover over the divisions in society.