During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, 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. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. However, ultimately, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Recently, two marked day 48 without food. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died 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. Another three have refused food for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported criminal damage, aggravated burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Some may not be face trial until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, stopping restrictions 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 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. Over 1,600 arrests linked to 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 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 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. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Ministers have said that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is understandably wary 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 “totally unacceptable”. When asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was cursory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
