In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners initiated 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. However, ultimately, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners currently refusing food are at growing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah is being treated in hospital after she reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Another three have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for reported criminal damage, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, as well as an reported intrusion 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. Demands include immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
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 deaths 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. Expert assessors 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 change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have pointed out 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 “very experienced” with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents. But it should not simply disregard this in the hope that it will go away. Recently, the failure of the Justice Secretary to reply to MPs’ requests for information was described as completely unsatisfactory. When asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. 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.
