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, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an resolution, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
An Escalating Danger to Lives
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she was said to have 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. A further two have now ended their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for alleged vandalism, serious 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 – much longer 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 proscription on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider proscription not because of 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 lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Urgent Issue 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 poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction and A Call to Engage
Authorities have stated that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is naturally cautious of establishing a precedent. 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 cursory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
