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 by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. However, ultimately, in private, the government sought an resolution, and the public mood had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Health
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at increasing 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.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Another three have refused food 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 hospitalisation.
The Context of Imprisonment
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged criminal damage, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, and in relation to an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – much longer the usual six-month limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a striking contrast 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. 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 should not await 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 substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Government Inaction 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 understandably wary of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply disregard 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 asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was cursory. The government must address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
