In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government sought an resolution, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The well-being of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two marked day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed 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, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported vandalism, aggravated burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as 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. Some may not be face trial until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and ending 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 lack of action and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests associated with 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 does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the legal and prison systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives 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 establishing a precedent. But it should not simply disregard 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 completely unsatisfactory. 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. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
