bradley manning and the human rights gatekeepers

Bradley Manning, the 22-year-old U.S. Army Private accused of leaking classified documents to WikiLeaks, has never been convicted of that crime, nor of any other crime. Despite that, he has been detained at the U.S. Marine brig in Quantico, Virginia for five months -- and for two months before that in a military jail in Kuwait -- under conditions that constitute cruel and inhumane treatment and, by the standards of many nations, even torture...

From the beginning of his detention, Manning has been held in intensive solitary confinement. For 23 out of 24 hours every day -- for seven straight months and counting -- he sits completely alone in his cell. Even inside his cell, his activities are heavily restricted; he's barred even from exercising and is under constant surveillance to enforce those restrictions. For reasons that appear completely punitive, he's being denied many of the most basic attributes of civilized imprisonment, including even a pillow or sheets for his bed...

Glenn Greenwald, The inhumane conditions of Bradley Manning's detention

And what does being held in such conditions do to you? According to the Istanbul statement on the use and effects of solitary confinement, adopted at the International Psychological Trauma Symposium in December 2007 -

It has been convincingly documented on numerous occasions that solitary confinement may cause serious psychological and sometimes physiological ill effects. Research suggests that between one third and as many as 90 per cent of prisoners experience adverse symptoms in solitary confinement. A long list of symptoms ranging from insomnia and confusion to hallucinations and psychosis has been documented. Negative health effects can occur after only a few days in solitary confinement, and the health risks rise with each additional day spent in such conditions.

Individuals may react to solitary confinement differently. Still, a significant number of individuals will experience serious health problems regardless of the specific conditions, regardless of time and place, and regardless of pre-existing personal factors. The central harmful feature of solitary confinement is that it reduces meaningful social contact to a level of social and psychological stimulus that many will experience as insufficient to sustain health and well being.

The Istanbul Statement goes on to outline the human rights aspects of solitary confinement:

The use of torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment is absolutely prohibited under international law (Article 7 of the UN convention on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and the UN convention against Torture (CAT), for example). The UN Human Rights Committee has stipulated that use of prolonged solitary confinement may amount to a breach of Article 7 of the ICCPR (General comment 20/44, 3. April 1992). The UN Committee against Torture has made similar statements, with particular reference to the use of solitary confinement during pre-trial detention.

So why do neither Human Rights Watch, nor Amnesty International regard Bradley Manning's case as worthy of mention? Human Rights' Watch's response to Joe Emersberger's challenge that they do so is that:

"We are concerned about the fact Bradley Manning has been held in prolonged isolation and other aspects of the investigation, and we are following his case through individuals who represent him. Human Rights Watch has protested the practice of prolonged solitary confinement in many contexts, including the United States. Our work on solitary confinement as an abuse of human rights is often listed as a resource, including on sites that are reporting on Private Manning’s plight. "

Well now good for you, Human Rights Watch. But as Emersberger points out, you have still made no public statement expressing this 'concern'; nor do you appear to be calling on the US government to stop treating this young man in a way which you yourselves claim is 'as clinically distressing as physical torture1'. Nor have you called on the US government to try the man, or to release him, as human rights law would have you do, and as you would normally do to governments which behave in such a way. Why not in this case?

It should be said that that other human rights gatekeeper, Amnesty International, has also failed to take up the case of Manning, or even to voice their 'concern' in public.

My letter to Amnesty:

Bradley Manning has been detained for 7 months but has not been convicted of any crime. He has been held in solitary confinement for the entire duration of that time, only allowed out of his cell for 1 hr per day. He has no sheets, no pillow, and is barred from exercising inside his cell. You must know all of this, and must have known about it for many months, yet I can find no reference to Bradley Manning on your website - except a brief mention in relation to Assange's case. You must also know that solitary confinement over a period of more than a few days is viewed by psychiatrists as - at least - inhuman and degrading treatment, if not a form of torture. It is destructive of the mind over the long term, driving a person to insanity.

Why, after 7 months of his being subjected to such treatment, do you still have nothing at all condemning the treatment of Bradley Manning, nothing demanding his immediate release or trial, nothing accusing the US government of breaking international human rights law? I can't help feeling that if a Chinese dissident was accused of having released a number of secret government documents, and was then held under such conditions, you might find words to mention it.

Thank you for any clarification.
EK

• 1. http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2010/03/22/solitary-confinement-and-mental-illness-us-prisons