In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration 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 exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she reportedly 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, is eating only every other day. A further two have since called off their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for reported criminal damage, aggravated burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – much longer the standard custody limit. Several 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 the banning order not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
There is a striking contrast 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 during a conflict in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have contended that proscription orders should be subject to time limits. The government does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter 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 poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated 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 fade. 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 perfunctory. The government must address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
