In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their political status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (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 reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Three more have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. A further two have since called off their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported criminal damage, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its lack of action and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that proscription orders should be subject to time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the legal and prison systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is understandably wary of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore this in the hope that it will fade. 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 address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
