[JURIST] Army Col. Denise Lind on Friday denied a motion to dismiss eight of the 22 charges against Pfc. Bradley Manning [advocacy website; JURIST news archive] for allegedly transferring vast amounts of classified information to Wikileaks [website; JURIST news archive]. The defense had argued that the charges against Manning were unconstitutionally vague. Manning’s trial is scheduled to begin in September, but Lind indicated it could be delayed until November [AP report]. Manning’s defense has argued that he never should have been deployed to Iraq or entrusted with confidential information because he is emotionally troubled since he was barred from openly serving as a gay man, and the leaks did not hurt US national security. The US Army has responded that Manning’s actions indirectly aided al Qaeda [AP report].
The US military court referred Manning’s case for court-martial [JURIST report] in February. Last month UN Special Rapporteur on torture the Juan Mendez accused the US government of cruel and inhuman treatment [JURIST report] against Manning. A US Army panel of experts declared Manning competent to stand trial [JURIST report] last April. Manning’s prosecution has sparked heated debate between defenders and critics. Those who support Manning’s actions refer to him as courageous for acting as a whistleblower [advocacy petition] against government crime and corruption. He has been compared to famous US whistleblowers such as Frank Serpico and Daniel Ellsberg [personal websites], who leaked information regarding corruption in the New York Police Department and the Pentagon, respectively.
Opinions expressed in JURIST Commentary are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JURIST's editors, staff, donors or the University of Pittsburgh.