In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their political status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. However, ultimately, in private, the government sought an resolution, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, two marked day 48 without food. (By comparison, 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 likewise received medical care. Three more have abstained from eating 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 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. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its lack of action 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. Expert assessors 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 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 substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be tagged while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated that prisons handle 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. Recently, the failure of the Justice Secretary to reply to MPs’ requests for information was described as “totally unacceptable”. When questioned on the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
