If the Met Police aren’t prepared to use spit hoods in public, then they shouldn’t be using them at all

We know that spit hoods have been frequently used to restrain children and adults with mental health issues. And given the over-representation of black and ethnic minority people in our criminal justice system, it’s inevitable that the introduction would result in discrimination

Spit hoods are used to prevent prisoners from biting or spitting on officers (Rex)

Shortly before I became Director of Liberty earlier this year, I represented an 11-year-old girl in a case against Sussex Police, brought under the Human Rights Act.

Child H had a rare neurological disorder that could cause sudden outbursts of anger. In early 2012, she was arrested three times and detained for a total of more than 60 hours with no appropriate adult.

Officers restrained this vulnerable, disabled child with handcuffs, leg restraints – and a “spit hood”.

Not many people in the UK will have encountered spit hoods, or “spit guards”, as police forces often innocuously brand them. Both descriptions are deceptively euphemistic.

These tightly-meshed bags, designed to be pulled over a person’s head and face, are an extreme, primitive and cruel tool that inspire fear, panic and anguish. They are more at home in a horror film than a civilised society.

Though widely deployed in the USA – where they have been linked to deaths in custody – their use here has so far been limited to a handful of smaller police forces.

Nevertheless, there have been many profoundly disturbing cases of officers using spit hoods unnecessarily and without justification – including on children and disabled people, like Child H. Most forces, including Greater Manchester, West Midlands and the Metropolitan Police Service, have wisely refused to sanction their use.

Until now. On Monday, the Met confirmed a radical and unjustifiable departure from its previous position. It announced plans to use spit hoods in all custody units from October.

On Tuesday, the force promptly backtracked – or at least paused, saying it had “listened to concerns and will consult further before starting any pilot”. But any plans to use spit hoods need to be off the table for good.

Detainees in police cells are under the complete control of their detainers. Many suffer from mental health problems. There have already been three deaths in Met Police custody this year, and many more assaults. The proposed introduction of spit hoods, in places where the scrutiny of the press and the public cannot reach beyond the custody desk, is alarming and misconceived.

Police officers do a brave and sometimes dangerous job, and must be able to protect themselves. They have many tools to use force against people when necessary – handcuffs, batons, arm restraints, leg restraints and pepper spray among them. There are also alternatives to spit hoods that protect officers, rather than restrict detainees – Essex Police, for example, provide safety glasses.

But, in a civilised society, lines must be drawn. Proportionate policing and policing by consent are bedrock principles of our democracy. And the case for using spit hoods has not been made.

There has been no assessment of their potential risks, no analysis of whether they are used in a discriminatory way, and there is no evidence that they are necessary. There is no national police guidance covering their use. We do not know that they keep police safer, prevent harm or calm aggressive detainees. On the contrary, their use is highly likely to inflame and aggravate.

What we do know is that spit hoods cause humiliation, degradation and great distress. We know that they have been frequently misused and abused, used to restrain children and vulnerable adults.

If the UK’s biggest force were to go ahead with a misconceived roll-out, we would see many more such tragic cases. The fact that the Met’s initial plans were to restrict the use of spit hoods to the closed world of the custody suite is particularly chilling.

Given the over-representation of black and ethnic minority people in our criminal justice system, it seems inevitable that the introduction of spit hoods would result in discrimination – further undermining police-community relations. As I write, the British Transport Police are under investigation by the IPCC after a young black man was filmed being pinned to the ground and hooded by our police officers in a London station.

The toxic legacy of incontrovertibly discriminatory stop and search on London’s streets should ring alarm bells for the Met. We all hoped they had learnt the lesson of that dark chapter.

At a time when our communities are struggling with post-Brexit division, hate crime and race inequality that is entrenched, far-reaching and growing, the use of spit hoods can lead only to discrimination, alienation and human rights abuses.

In June, Scotland Yard’s new head of diversity Victor Olisa warned that the Force’s longstanding failings on race relations were damaging its legitimacy and ability to police by consent. The proposed introduction of spit hoods is a sad sign that the Met have not heeded that warning. They must think again.

Martha Spurrier is Director of Liberty