In 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; 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 well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed 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. Another three have abstained from eating 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 Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged vandalism, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the usual six-month limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of prompt release on bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity 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 during a conflict in Gaza. More than 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 contended 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 Remand
With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Ministers have said that prisons handle 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. Last week, 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 address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
