In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow 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, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The well-being of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, 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. 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 now ended their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for alleged vandalism, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already 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 immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Official Reaction
There is a striking contrast between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. Over 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 proscription orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Failures of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is understandably wary of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore 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 “totally unacceptable”. When asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was cursory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
