In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two marked day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she was said to have collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has likewise received medical care. Three more have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported criminal damage, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the standard custody limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider proscription not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Glaring Disparity in Government Response
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have contended that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should tackle the issue of remand. Failures of the legal and prison systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents. But it should not simply ignore this in the hope that it will go away. Recently, the failure of the Justice Secretary to reply to MPs’ requests for information was described as completely unsatisfactory. When questioned on the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
