In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government sought an resolution, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners currently refusing food are at growing risk. Recently, two reached 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 also been treated. Three more have refused food for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported criminal damage, aggravated burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – much longer the usual six-month limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and ending the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Glaring Disparity 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 loss of life of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have argued that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Failures of the justice and penal 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 cannot be justified, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated that prisons handle 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 disregard 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 asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was cursory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
