During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Health
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike 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.) Twenty-year-old Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted 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 another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have since called off their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
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 reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – 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 the banning order not due to 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 severe enthusiasm in this regard and its lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have contended that proscription orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Failures of the justice and penal 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 exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Authorities have stated that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents. But it should not simply ignore this in the hope that it will fade. 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 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.
