In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated 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 by the time of his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. However, ultimately, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and the public mood had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without food. (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 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. A further two have now ended their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the usual six-month limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include prompt release on 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 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 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. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that proscription orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Urgent Issue 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 substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods 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 An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated that prisons see 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 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 “totally unacceptable”. When asked about 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.
