In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their political status. Ten men ultimately perished; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. However, ultimately, in private, the government sought an resolution, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
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 sustenance. (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 reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Three more have refused food for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, and in relation to an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – far exceeding the usual six-month limit. Some may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have argued that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should tackle the issue of remand. Failures 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. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Ministers have said that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is naturally cautious 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 “totally unacceptable”. When questioned on 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 dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
