During 1981, IRA and other republican 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, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. However, ultimately, in private, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Recently, 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 was said to have collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has likewise received medical care. Another three have refused food for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported criminal damage, 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 – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider 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 severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths 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. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle 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 for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be tagged while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction and An Appeal for Dialogue
Ministers have said that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is understandably wary of establishing a precedent. 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 “totally unacceptable”. When asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
