During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten men ultimately perished; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, 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 is being treated in hospital after she reportedly 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, is eating only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged criminal damage, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, and in relation to an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the proscription on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Official Reaction
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 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. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have argued that proscription orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await 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 legal and prison systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said that prisons handle 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 go away. Recently, the failure of the Justice Secretary to reply to MPs’ requests for information was described as “totally unacceptable”. 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. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
