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; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. However, ultimately, in private, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Last Friday, two marked day 48 without food. (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 was said to have collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has likewise received medical care. Three more have refused food for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Context of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for reported criminal damage, 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. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the usual six-month limit. Several 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 proscription not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Glaring Disparity in Government Response
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. Over 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 argued that proscription orders should be subject to time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings 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. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated 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 disregard 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 “totally unacceptable”. When asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was cursory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
