In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, calling for the return of their special category status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government sought an exit, and the public mood had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at growing risk. Recently, two marked day 48 without food. (For context, 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 likewise received medical care. Three more have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the standard custody limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths 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 contended 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
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the justice and penal systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is naturally cautious of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore 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 perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and review the arguments for bail. Currently it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
