Australian Human Rights Commission Current issues and good practices in prison management, 16 November 2023 of causing anxiety, agitation, acute distress and disorientation to the detainees and can trigger other adverse reactions such as panic’.108 67. These comments from the Special Rapporteur come almost a year after Australia was cautioned by the UN Committee Against Torture, that ‘the use of spit [hoods] was an archaic practice that amounted to ill-treatment’.109 The UN Committee Against Torture then recommending that Australia ‘take all necessary measures to end the use of spit hoods in all circumstances across all jurisdictions’.110 68. On 14 April 2023, the Australian Federal Police (and Australian Capital Territory Police) announced they would no longer use spit hoods ‘after an internal review found the ‘risk of using spithoods outweighed the benefits of their use, given they are ineffective in protecting against transmissible diseases’.111 69. The Commission welcomes these and other operational bans which other Australian policing forces have similarly enacted (apart from Western Australia).112 However, in regard to the operational bans, the Northern Territory Ombudsman made the following observation in their most recent spit hood investigation: An administrative policy change sends a strong message to members about the direction the organisation currently wishes to take. However, the disadvantage with this approach is that subsequent social pressures or changes in key leadership roles have the potential to result in rapid reversal.113 70. The use of spit hoods is likewise prohibited in youth detention but despite progress in these areas they are still used in some Australian prisons. South Australia remains the only jurisdiction to have passed legislation to ban spit hoods in all circumstances.114 71. In November 2023, the Victorian Commission for Children and Young People, reported on the use of a spit hood on a child under the age of 18 in adult custody.115 The Commission for Children and Young People found ‘ a range of significant concerns’ including effective isolation of the young person, restricted access to water and the application of the spit hood despite the young person not having been involved in a spitting incident.116 72. The Commission also remains concerned about continuing rhetoric that reinforces disease transmissibility as a reason not to legislate against spit hoods.117 While not discounting the concern that officers may have after being bitten or spat at, as noted by the Commission and more recently by the Northern Territory Ombudsman, ‘educating members on the scientific 16