In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their political status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners currently refusing food are at growing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has likewise received medical care. Three more have refused food for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Context of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged criminal damage, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, and in relation to an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and ending the proscription on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order 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 seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. Over 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 should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said 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 fade. Last week, 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 perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and review the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
