During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their political status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
An Escalating Danger to Lives
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without food. (By comparison, 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 reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Another three have refused food for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported vandalism, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already 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, stopping restrictions on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink 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 glaring disparity 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. More than 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 ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision 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 increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents. But it should not simply disregard this in the expectation that it will go away. 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 examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
