During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (By comparison, 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. 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 Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, and in relation to 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. Some may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a striking contrast between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the loss of life 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 argued that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Failures of the legal and prison systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have pointed out 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. Recently, 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 perfunctory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
