During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow 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, 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 was looking for an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, 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 also been treated. Another three have abstained from eating 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 hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, 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 – far exceeding the usual six-month limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Their requests consist of 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 disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
There is a glaring disparity 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 in a war in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors 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 reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention
With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives 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 highly familiar with them. The government is naturally cautious of setting precedents. But it should not simply disregard this in the hope that it will fade. Last week, the failure of the Justice Secretary to reply to MPs’ requests for information was described as completely unsatisfactory. 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 dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.