During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their political status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an resolution, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Health
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two reached 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 is being treated in hospital after she was said to have 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, one after being hospitalized.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported criminal damage, aggravated 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. Each has already spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the standard custody limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. More than 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 should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the legal and prison 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 cannot be justified, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
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 naturally cautious of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore this in the expectation 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 questioned on the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
