Selected topics from 2019 The Ministry suggested that the spit hood could be used on inmates placed in common areas while socializing with others, as a measure to prevent solitary confinement. The Parliamentary Ombudsman pointed out that it is unlikely that more meaningful human contact can take place if inmates are wearing a spit hood in addition to mechanical restraints such as handcuffs or body cuffs while interacting with other inmates. This can have a humiliating and dehumanising effect on the inmates and constitutes a clear risk of inhuman and degrading treatment. We also criticised the Ministry’s failure to explain the risks linked to using a spit hood. An EU ­regulation on controlling the trade in items that can be used to inflict torture or inhuman treatment show that spit hoods pose a risk of asphyxiation. Several cases have been reported in other ­countries where people have died while wearing spit hoods, and where disproportionate use ­appears to have contributed to or caused the death. We emphasised that having a hood pulled down over one’s head can contribute to a strong sense of fear, high levels of stress, a feeling of loss of control and a sensation of being choked. This particularly applies to people with serious ­conditions, such as psychosis, anxiety and ­phobias, such as claustrophobia. This is a ­particular cause for concern given that a high ­proportion of the inmates in Norwegian prisons have serious mental health issues, to a much greater extent than the rest of the population in general. 41 In addition to spit hoods, the Ministry also proposed lowering the threshold for the use of restraints such as hand cuffs and body cuffs. The Parliamentary Ombudsman disagrees with the Ministry that these restraints are less intrusive. A body cuff can restrict the inmates’ freedom of movement to the extent that they cannot walk or move their arms. The fact that the use of a spit hood entails both a hood and a mechanical restraint being placed on the inmate, indicates that this is a highly intrusive coercive measure. We also expressed concern that the purpose of the proposed amendments was to prevent inmates being confined to their cells because it did not seem advisable to let the person spend time in common areas without wearing restraints. The Ministry’s proposal is inadequate for ­addressing the challenges of solitary ­confinement. The ­proposal to introduce the use of spit hoods and to lower the threshold for using other ­restraints indicate that a more integrated approach is necessary for creating prison conditions that prevent the need to use such intrusive measures. The Parliamentary Ombudsman pointed out that implementing measures to counteract the high degree of solitary confinement in prisons is now of urgent importance.