In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their special category status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an resolution, and the public mood had shifted significantly.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, 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, consumes food only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the usual six-month limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider proscription not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity 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 associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle 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 this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Government Inaction and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated that prisons see 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 disregard this in the expectation that it will go away. Last week, 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 review the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
