70 ANNUAL REPORT 2015 son’s wrists were fixated with plastic strips, and the parents’ wrists were fixated with fabric strips which were tied to a belt (restraint belt). The family were seated in the back seats of the empty plane. The captain – who is always the highest authority on board – came to assess the situation. Despite the family’s loud appeals, he let them stay on the plane. A few minutes later, the other passengers boarded the plane, and the family members now addressed their appeals to them until the plane left the gate 20 minutes later. Hereafter, only the father shouted. He shouted in English that he would bomb the plane. When the plane was airborne, the entire family sat in silence. The police constable in charge of the deportation talked to the father whereupon the police constables removed the strips from the family members’ wrists. FORCIBLE MEASURES CRITICISM OF INSUFFICIENT DOCUMENTATION The police can use forcible measures during deportations – e.g. a firm grip/manual force, plastic strips, handcuffs, protection helmet and restraint belt. Experience from the monitoring indicates that the most frequently used forcible measures are restraint belt, a firm grip/manual force and plastic strips. Handcuffs are rarely used. Between April 2011 and December 2015, the Ombudsman received information about 79 deportations where the police had to make use of forcible measures. We monitored the forcible measures in 25 cases. The police did not violate the Police Act’s rules on forcible measures in any of the 25 cases. Moreover, the forcible measures were in compliance with police guidelines. The Police Act stipulates that forcible measures must be ‘necessary and safe’, and ‘solely by means and to an extent that are in proportion to the interest they aim to protect’. Moreover, the police must use force as gently as the circumstances permit and in such a way that any harm is reduced to a minimum. It also follows from internal police guidelines on deportations that force during deportations must always be used in such a way that the disturbance of the surroundings is kept at a minimum. Based on information provided by the police concerning the remaining cases, it is the Ombudsman’s opinion that the use of forcible measures in 47 cases complied with the rules about forcible measures in the Police Act. However, in 25 cases it was impossible for the Ombudsman to assess whether the rules of the Police Act were observed, because there was insufficient documentation of force in these specific cases. Since the Ombudsman began to monitor forced deportations, he has several times criticised the police for not having sufficiently documented the use of forcible measures during deportations. In 2014, the police published – on the Ombudsman’s recommendation – the first summary of the use of forcible measures in connection with deportations.