In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow 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. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The well-being of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed on the 46th day.) Twenty-year-old Qesser Zuhrah is being treated in hospital after she was said to have 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, is eating only every other day. A further two have since called off their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for alleged vandalism, serious burglary and public 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 usual six-month limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
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. More than 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have argued that proscription orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings 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. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most exceptionally serious 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 naturally cautious of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply disregard this in the expectation 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 cursory. The government must address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
