In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
An Escalating Danger to Lives
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed 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 also been treated. Three more have refused food for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Context 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, as well as an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Glaring Disparity in Government Response
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings 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 cannot be justified, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Authorities have stated 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 expectation that it will fade. Last week, 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 cursory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. Currently it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
