During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, demanding the restoration 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 adopted a publicly uncompromising position. However, ultimately, in private, the government sought an resolution, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (For context, 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 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. Two others have now ended their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged criminal damage, 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 prior to their day in court – much longer the standard custody limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not because of 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 draconian zeal in this regard and its lack of action and seeming apathy when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. More than 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 does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings 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. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives 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 naturally cautious of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore 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 questioned on the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was cursory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
