In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government sought an resolution, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at growing risk. Last Friday, two marked day 48 without sustenance. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died 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 likewise received medical care. Three more have refused food for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, one 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, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the standard custody limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands in a war 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 contended that proscription orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Failures of the legal and prison systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, except for 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
Authorities have stated that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents. But it should not simply ignore this in the hope 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 questioned on the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
