During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten would die; remarkably, 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.
An Escalating Danger to Lives
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Recently, 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 reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has likewise received medical care. Another three have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Context of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported vandalism, aggravated burglary and public 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 usual six-month limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending 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 Government Response
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its lack of action and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have contended that proscription orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Failures 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. 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.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Ministers have said 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 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. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
