Hooding and other equivalent practices are intentional forms of sensory deprivation which constitute cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment and should be prohibited in interrogations and detention. When hooding is practiced in conjunction with other acts that may be considered cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment or punishment, it may constitute torture. In our experience, hooding is very often practiced in combination with other methods of abuse and typically, under such circumstances, constitutes torture. — Excerpt from the IFEG Statement on Hooding, TORTURE journal, Vol. 21, No. 3, 2011 Hooding banned forever in the UK “Hooding,” the practice of fully covering the head of a person, has been internationally recognised as a form of torture by various human rights bodies. The British government forbid its use in 1972 after it was condemned by the European Court of Human Rights. Despite this, a 2003 inquiry into the death of Iraqi detainee, Baha Mousa, who died in custody, revealed that the practice was widespread by British troops in both Iraq and Afghanistan and authorised by military guidelines. A post-mortem found that Mousa sustained 93 external injuries and that hooding was a contributing factor in his death. The IFEG provided an expert statement on the psychological effects of hooding, which was used by Public Interest Lawyers in the case of Alaa’ Nassif Jassim al-Bazzouni in the UK High Court, when the court outlawed the practice “forever”. Writing in the scientific journal, TORTURE, the group of experts attested that hooding is associated with a number of physical and psychological effects. The practice of hooding typically involves covering the head of a detainee in some manner. Hooding practices may vary and the effects of hooding may depend on a number of factors related to the application and context of its use including: the mate- 12 International Rehabilitation Council for Torture Victims rial composition of the hood (i.e. the effectiveness of sensory deprivation and interference with air exchange), duration and frequency of its use, tightness of the hood around the head, the presence of contaminants (i.e. urine, feces and blood) in the hood, and the use of additional methods of torture and/or cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment (CIDT). Mock executions, beatings and other methods of torture are often practiced in conjunction with hooding to maximise the infliction of physical and psychological pain. In their statement, the international forensic experts assert that: “Interrogation personnel are rarely aware of such conditions and cannot reasonably be expected to be able to make an assessment of whether the use of a hood would pose a risk to health”. Public Interest Lawyers, acting for Alaa’ Nassif Jassim al-Bazzouni, an Iraqi national who says he was abused and hooded by British troops in 2006, successfully challenged the guideline issued by the UK government, which unlawfully authorised the hooding of prisoners. The case illustrates how forensic expertise can play an important role in legal action at a national level, with international impact.