In footage which sparked a global outcry, Dylan Voller was hooded and tied up in a restraint chair with straps at his ankles, wrists and neck. The Northern Territory’s chief minister admits it ‘didn’t look good on television’

The story of the chair: how a brutal device was brought into Australia's youth jails

The video of 17-year-old Dylan Voller shirtless, hooded, and tied to a restraint chair for two hours in an Australian juvenile detention facility has generated shockwaves.

The chair was fitted with numerous straps to hold Voller, including at the ankles, wrists, and neck.

On Tuesday, the day after the footage aired on the ABC program Four Corners, the chief minister of the Northern Territory, Adam Giles, conceded the restraint chair “didn’t look good on television”.

Malcolm Turnbull will not broaden inquiry into NT juvenile detention Read more

The chair is not widely used in Australian corrections, and is presently only in the Northern Territory, Queensland and in a trial in Western Australia.

Giles said the issue of appropriate restraints was something he would like the royal commission into the territory’s juvenile justice system – announced on Tuesday by the prime minister – to examine.

“That’s what we want the royal commission to take a look at, whether we made the right decision or not,” he told Lateline.

The announcement of a royal commission by the prime minister, Malcolm Turnbull, was welcomed by Giles, who – despite several years of questioning over the issue – professed shock and ignorance about the abuse in the Don Dale juvenile detention centre.

On Wednesday Giles said he would have to take advice but he believed “the restraint chair as I understand it is part of the adult correctional system”.



But just three months ago the NT government passed legislation widening the usage of mechanical restraints, including the restraint chair.



The youth justice amendment bill, introduced by the attorney general, John Elferink, sought to “clarify” the use of mechanical restraints in Northern Territory correctional facilities.

What it did was widen the scope of their use, and leave exactly what implements constituted a “mechanical device” undefined.

“An approved restraint is the mechanical device the commission for correctional services has approved for restricting the movement of detainees,” read the amendment.

In his second reading speech, Elferink said: “The newly inserted definition of an ‘approved restraint’ also ensures that modern mechanical devices of restraint or advancements in technology will adequately be provided for in the Youth Justice Act. The bill thereby omits all references to ‘handcuffs or a similar device’ and replaces it with ‘approved restraint’.”

Standard guidelines for corrections in Australia say use of restraints should be “of the least restrictive type appropriate … [and] applied for the minimum time necessary to control the prisoner”.

The youth justice amendment bill passed the parliament despite unanimous opposition from Labor.

Alex Tighe, a member of the legal team acting for Voller, was incredulous about Giles’s calls for the royal commission to examine the appropriateness of restraints.

“If they’re passing legislation and not inquiring why they’re passing that legislation, it’s either incompetence or something much much worse than that,” he told Guardian Australia.

“It seems like a post hoc rationalising of the use of the chair. As far as I understand the chair was used on Dylan in, I believe, March 2015, and it was not reported in the media until October, and then shortly after John Elferink proposed the youth justice bill and that was passed in November 2015,” he said.

“Obviously laws don’t act retrospectively so there’s a question mark over the legality of the use of the chair pre-2015, and there remains a question mark over the legality and ethical considerations of using that chair regardless.”

Jared Sharp, legal officer at the North Australian Aboriginal Justice Agency (Naaja), told Guardian Australia the only conclusion to take from the youth justice amendment bill was that it would enable an increase in the usage.

Sharp said he was aware of just two instances of a juvenile being placed in the restraint chair, and both times it was Voller.

“I’ve not encountered it being used for other kids,” he said. “But I have heard of spithoods allegedly used as punishment, for non-spitters.”

After the horrific footage from Don Dale, we need to see what hasn't been shown Read more

On Wednesday morning a former guard revealed he had witnessed Voller strapped in the chair several times.

Deo Indevar, a lawyer on the team acting for Voller, said the chair was “simply humiliating”.

“I can’t imagine them being able to say it’s also necessary to put a spit hood in addition to the leg cuffs and hand restraints if it was to prevent self harm,” he said.

Such a restraint “certainly” should not be used in the youth justice system, especially for prolonged periods.

“Perhaps for the most extreme of cases for adults. But when we’re dealing with youth, it shouldn’t be used.”

On Wednesday morning Giles said restraints and spit hoods would no longer be used until a review had taken place.

Tighe said such a promise was “utterly meaningless”.

“These restraints are inhumane and should never have been used, and ought never to be used again,” he said.

