National Preventive Mechanism Third Annual Report 2011–12 Monitoring of Frontex flights has caused particular concern among IMBs. On a Frontex flight, detainees from several EU Member States may be returned to their country of origin at the same time. One Member State is responsible for organising the flight while Frontex coordinates with the authorities from other participating States. Although the flight is coordinated by Frontex, detainees are escorted by staff of the country from which they are being returned. The IMBs have found that this results in variable standards of treatment on board flights in relation to, for example: • the manner in which detainees are managed by escort staff – board members have noted that staff from some countries appear to be more confrontational and prone to use force than others • the nature and extent of force used against detainees – for example, unlike the UK, some countries use chemical restraint and restraint appears to be more routinely used • certification of fitness to fly • health care provision during the flight • appropriate provision of escorts of both sexes where women are removed. The variation in treatment experienced by detainees on the same flight raises jurisdictional concerns about who is ultimately responsible for the safety and well-being of detainees while they are being removed. Standards of treatment acceptable to one participating State may not be acceptable to another. In assessing the feasibility of continued monitoring of overseas escorts, the IMBs have recognised the important role they can play and have been reassured by the positive impact of their work. They have concluded that they will continue to monitor overseas escorts in the future. 32 HMIP has a statutory duty to monitor IRCs, STHFs and escort arrangements for immigration detainees. While it has been monitoring the escorting of detainees within the UK for several years, HMIP carried out its first two inspections of overseas escorts in 2011. In future, overseas escorts will form a regular part of HMIP’s inspection programme. The escorted overseas removals inspected were to Jamaica and Nigeria. The inspections involved accompanying the escorts from when they collected detainees from an IRC to the point that detainees disembarked from the aircraft in the destination country. Like the IMBs, HMIP found that both flights were orderly and, in most respects, reasonably well managed. Most escorts performed their duties well and dealt sensitively with the needs of individual detainees. However, HMIP was concerned about the lax and unprofessional approach of a minority of escort staff on one flight who, within hearing of detainees, swore freely, used offensive and racist language, and made sweeping generalisations about national characteristics. They were not challenged by colleagues or managers. Overseas escorts are inevitably stressful events and the vulnerability of detainees during the process of removal was taken too lightly. Staff numbers were excessive, with more than three times as many escorts as detainees on one flight. There was no accredited training for the use of force on aircraft. In one case, a detainee continued to have his head restrained when he had become compliant. Handcuffs and force should only be used as a last resort and for the minimum time necessary, but HMIP found shortcomings in the application of both requirements. In one case, a detainee was kept in handcuffs for more than two hours, even though detention staff acknowledged that she was upset rather than ‘kicking off’.