In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government sought an resolution, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at growing risk. Last Friday, 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 is being treated 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 one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have since called off their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged vandalism, aggravated 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 before trial – much longer the standard custody limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Glaring Disparity in Government Response
There is a striking contrast 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 in a war in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests linked to 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 does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Failures of the legal and prison systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be tagged while awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated that prisons see 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 disregard this in the expectation that it will go away. 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 examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
