During 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 men ultimately perished; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. However, ultimately, in private, the government was looking for an resolution, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, two marked day 48 without sustenance. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed on the 46th day.) Twenty-year-old Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has likewise received medical care. Three more 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 being hospitalized.
The Context of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged criminal damage, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as 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. Some may not be tried until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not due to 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 draconian zeal in this regard and its inaction and apparent indifference 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 quarter following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have contended that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the justice and penal systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and substandard detention environments. 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. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be tagged while awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Ministers have said that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is naturally cautious of setting precedents. But it should not simply disregard this in the hope 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 asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was cursory. The government must address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
