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; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food 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 was said to have collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Another three have refused food for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have since called off their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, and in relation to an reported intrusion 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 face trial until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Glaring Disparity 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 linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that proscription orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should change its mind 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 ever-longer waiting times and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency 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 disregard 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 asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
