In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners initiated a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their special category status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners 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 – died on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah is being treated 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, consumes food only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are being held for alleged vandalism, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, and in relation to an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the standard custody limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Glaring Disparity in Government Response
There is a striking contrast between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its inaction and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have contended that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should tackle 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 this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Government Inaction and A Call to Engage
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 disregard this in the hope 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 asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was cursory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
