During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners initiated a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, calling for the return of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government sought an resolution, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two marked day 48 without sustenance. (For context, 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. Three more have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. A further two have since called off their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged vandalism, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to 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. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits 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 severe enthusiasm in this regard and its lack of action and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands in a war 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 contended that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Urgent Issue 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 this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Authorities have stated that prisons handle 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 ignore this in the hope that it will fade. Recently, the failure of the Justice Secretary to reply to MPs’ requests for information was described as “totally unacceptable”. When questioned on the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
