During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Recently, two marked day 48 without food. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted 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 another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported criminal damage, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, 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 face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate 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 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 lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the loss of life 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 banning orders should be subject to 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 tackle the issue of remand. Failures of the legal and prison systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated 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 fade. 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 engage with the issue and review the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
