In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their special category 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. However, ultimately, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an resolution, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
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 sustenance. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died 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 another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for alleged criminal damage, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Striking Contrast in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its lack of action and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months 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 high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Failures of the legal and prison systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long 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 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 setting precedents. But it should not simply ignore 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 completely unsatisfactory. When questioned on the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. Currently it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
