be considered as “prompt” and has ultimately resulted in the full denial of Guantánamo detainees’ right to legal assistance over a lengthy period of time. 178. While Guantánamo detainees’ right to legal assistance is no longer denied as a matter of law, logistical constraints due to Guantánamo’s location and policies adopted by the Joint Task Force Guantánamo (JTF-GTMO),263 continue to hinder, even sometimes to prevent, regular access to lawyers. For instance, lawyers have to submit a request to the Department of Defense to meet with their client, have to take time away from their legal practice and have to pay for their trips to Guantánamo, which may create problems for pro bono lawyers.264 The number of flights to Guantánamo has also been severely curtailed by the US government, which has forced attorneys to “wait in queue for at least two months before they may meet with their clients”.265 179. Additionally, some policies put in place by the JTF-GTMO, such as the modified search procedure instituted since May 2013, have an adverse impact on detainees’ access to counsel. Each time a detainee is moved from a cell to meet with non-JTF-GTMO personnel, this new procedure is conducted two to four times, including for meetings and phone calls with their attorneys.266 The procedure involves a full body search, including a genital search, and is reportedly used for the safety of guards and detainees.267 To avoid being subjected to such invasive searches, multiple detainees have refused phone calls or meetings with counsel.268 For instance, Mohammad al Rahman al Shumrani said he did not attend his meetings with lawyers and his PRB hearing because he found the searches humiliating and degrading.269 In July 2013, the District of Columbia District Court found this procedure to be invalid, as it effectively left detainees “without alternative avenues to 263 The JTF-GTMO is the principal organization running the detention facility. It is comprised of a multi-service military task force placed under the Southern Command. The JTF-GTMO is responsible for all logistical issues related to the operation of the facility, such as providing medical care, meals and communal facilities of the detainees. They are also in charge of the transportation to and from the court complex as well as facilitation of legal representation of the detainees, by arranging meetings with lawyers or providing all types of communication between the detainees and their lawyers. 264 ODIHR interview with Matthew O’Hara, op. cit., note 255: O’Hara explained that travelling to Guantánamo may require lawyers to be absent from their legal practice for an entire week and cost thousands of dollars; ODIHR interview with David Remes, op. cit., note 255: Remes mentioned that one trip may cost approximately $1,200. 265 “The government has severely curtailed the number of flights to Guantanamo. Predictably, given the limited number of commercial flights to Guantanamo, counsel must now wait in queue for at least two months before they may meet with their clients”. United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Saeed Mohammed Saleh Hatim v. Barack H. Obama, Misc. No. 12-mc-398, 11 July 2013, <https://ecf.dcd.uscourts.gov/cgi-bin/show_public_doc?2012mc0398-47>. In this regard, US officials have argued that the United States has not curtailed commercial flights to Guantánamo, which they do not control. On the contrary, they said that the Government has fought to ensure that these commercial flights would be maintained. US comments to the draft report. 266 While the government has indicated that detainees are searched twice, i.e., once before the meeting in question and once after, counsel for one of the detainees stated that detainees would be searched four times, i.e., once before leaving their cell, once after transportation to the location of the meeting, once after said meeting and prior to their transportation back, and once upon return to their cells. United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Hatim v. Obama, ibid. 267 US representatives reported finding weapons and hoarding of medication, which led to the need for this procedure. ODIHR meeting with the Department of Defense Office of the General Counsel and Office of Detainee Policy, op. cit., note 194. See, also, United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Hatim v. Obama, ibid. 268 ODIHR interview with Brent Rushforth, op. cit., note 207: Rushforth reported that he had not been able to meet with his clients since this procedure was put in place. See, also, ODIHR interview with the Center for Constitutional Rights, op. cit., note 255; United States District Court for the District of Columbia, Hatim v. Obama, ibid. 269 “Opening Statement of Personal Representative for Muhammad Abd Al-Rahman Al-Shumrani”, Periodic Review Board website, 5 May 2014, <http://www.prs.mil/Portals/60/Documents/ISN195/140416_U_ISN195_PR_OPENING_STATEMENT_UNCLASS_PUBLIC.p df>. 74