During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an resolution, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food 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 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, is eating only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
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 reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the usual six-month limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a striking contrast between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands in a war 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 banning orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention
More urgently, 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 this long for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Authorities have stated that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents. But it should not simply ignore this in the hope that it will go away. 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 address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
