In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an resolution, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Recently, two marked day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed 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 also been treated. Three more have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported criminal damage, 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 usual six-month limit. Some may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
There is a striking contrast between the government’s draconian zeal 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 linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have contended that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings 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 extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.
Government Inaction and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is naturally cautious of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore this in the expectation 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 perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and review the arguments for bail. Currently it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
