US says Manning leak hurt human rights work

[struggle4progress]

28. Pilkington, like too many other Assangists, misrepresented that report

The real issue is that Mendez was not allowed an unmonitored visit, which IMO he should have been allowed. Absent permission for an unmonitored visit, Mendez declined to visit at all, a decision which IMO was entirely consistent with his official UN position and his obligation to uphold universal standards. But this left Mendez with only allegations and his correspondence, on the basis of which he could only reiterate universal standards, such as "imposing seriously punitive conditions of detention on someone who has not been found guilty of any crime is a violation of his right to physical and psychological integrity as well as of his presumption of innocence"

Here's what the Report actually said:

(a) UA 30/12/2010 Case No.USA 20/2010 State reply:27/01/2011 19/05/2011
Allegations of prolonged solitaryconfinement of a soldier charged with the unauthorized disclosure of classified information
170.The Special Rapporteur thanks the Governmentof the United States of America forits response to this communication regarding the alleged prolonged solitary confinement ofMr. Bradley E. Manning, a US soldier charged with the unauthorized disclosure ofclassified information. According to the information received, Mr. Manning was held insolitary confinement for twenty-three hours a day following his arrest in May 2010 in Iraq,and continuing through his transfer to the brig at Marine Corps Base Quantico. His solitaryconfinement-lasting about eleven months-was terminated upon his transfer fromQuantico to the Joint Regional Correctional Facility at Fort Leavenworth on 20 April 2011.Inhis report, the Special Rapporteur stressed that “solitary confinement is a harsh measure which may cause serious psychological and physiological adverse effects on individuals regardless of their specific conditions.” Moreover, “[d]epending on the specific reason for its application, conditions, length, effects and other circumstances, solitary confinement canamount to a breach ofarticle 7of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights,and to an act defined in article 1 or article 16 of theConvention against Torture.”(A/66/268paras. 79 and 80)Before the transfer of Pfc Manning to Fort Leavenworth, theSpecialRapporteurrequested an opportunity to interview him in order to ascertain the preciseconditions of his detention. The US Government authorized the visit but ascertained that itcould not ensure thattheconversation would not be monitored. Since a non-privateconversation with an inmate would violate the terms of reference applied universally infact-finding by Special Procedures, theSpecial Rapporteurhad to decline the invitation. In response to the Special Rapporteur’s request for the reason to hold an unindicted detaineein solitary confinement, the government responded that his regimen was not “solitary confinement” but “prevention of harm watch” but did not offer details about what harm was being prevented. To the Special Rapporteur’s request for information on the authority toimpose and the purpose of the isolation regime, the government responded that the prisonrules authorized the brig commander to impose it on account of the seriousness of the offense for which he would eventually be charged. TheSpecial Rapporteur concludes that imposing seriously punitive conditions of detention on someone who has not been found guilty of any crime is a violation of his right to physical and psychological integrity as wellas of his presumption of innocence. The Special Rapporteur again renews his request for aprivate and unmonitored meeting with Mr. Manning to assess his conditions of detention.

(b) AL 15/06/2011 Case No.USA 8/2011State reply: None to date
Follow-up to a letter sent 13May2011 requesting a private unmonitored meeting with Private(Pfc.) Bradley Manning.
171.The Special Rapporteur thanks the Government of the United States of America forits response to the communication dated 13 May 2011 requesting a private unmonitored meeting with Private Bradley Manning. Regrettably, to date the Government continues to refuse to allow the Special Rapporteur to conduct private, unmonitored, and privileged communicationswith Private Manning, in accordance with the working methods of his mandate (E/CN.4/2006/6 paras. 20-27).