In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government sought an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners 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 – died on the 46th day.) Twenty-year-old 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, is eating only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported 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 prior to their day in court – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Their requests consist of prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the ban 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 seeming apathy 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. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have argued that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention
With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Failures 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.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
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 ignore this in the hope 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 address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
