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 would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. However, ultimately, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing 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.) 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 one other, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, 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 standard custody limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Striking Contrast in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm 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 quarter following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that proscription orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should address 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 this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be tagged while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction 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 establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore this in the expectation that it will fade. 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 perfunctory. The government must address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
