In 1981, IRA and other republican 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. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. However, ultimately, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at growing risk. Last Friday, two marked day 48 without sustenance. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died on the 46th day.) Twenty-year-old 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 refused food for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged criminal damage, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, 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 usual six-month limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the ban 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 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 associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have contended that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Failures of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long 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.
Government Inaction and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is naturally cautious of setting precedents. But it should not simply ignore 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 “totally unacceptable”. 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. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
