Prohibit handcuffing behind back while seated
Brook House Inquiry · The Brook House Inquiry Report · Issued 19 September 2023 · Addressed to: Home Office
Source — verbatim from the inquiry
●Inquiry recommendation
The Home Office and contractors operating immigration removal centres must ensure that all staff are aware that the technique of handcuffing detained people with their hands behind their back while seated is not permitted, given its association with positional asphyxia.
Brook House Inquiry, The Brook House Inquiry Report · 19 Sep 2023 Source PDF →
Published evidence summary
Publicly available evidence relating to this recommendation:
- In December 2025, DSO 11/2025 (Use of Force for Adults in Detention) was published, explicitly prohibiting handcuffs behind the back while seated and citing the association with positional asphyxia, with a reference to the statutory basis in Section 44 of the Border Security, Asylum and Immigration Act 2025 (Detention Services Order 11/2025, Home Office, 19 December 2025).
Response — verbatim from government
●Home Office
The government has communicated to all IRC and contracted service provider staff that the technique of handcuffing behind backs whilst seated is not permitted.
Home Office · 19 Mar 2024 Written response →
Evidence trail — what's actually happened since
- 14 Jan 2025 Angela Eagle, Written PQ 23170 (15 January 2025): 'Completed and closed as of October 2024.' Source →
- 19 Sep 2024 · Brook House Inquiry Chair Inquiry Chair Kate Eves described government response as "inadequate" and called for a "reset" with the new government. Warned abuse "becomes a question of when, not if" it happens again. Insufficient Progress
Each entry above links to a primary source — gov.uk written statement, consultation response document, or inspection report. The Index does not characterise government intent; it tracks what has been published.
How this page is built
Source and Response are verbatim from primary documents. The Evidence trail records published activity since — written statements, consultation outcomes, inspection findings, parliamentary references. The Index does not paraphrase or characterise intent; it tracks what has been published. Where the evidence is the absence of action (a missed deadline, a slipped timetable), that absence is documented from primary sources rather than inferred.
This recommendation's data is verified periodically against primary sources. The Index is monitored for staleness weekly.