During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, calling for the return of their political status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. However, ultimately, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners 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 – succumbed 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. Another three have refused food for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for reported criminal damage, aggravated 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 – much longer the usual six-month limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Their requests consist of immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have contended that proscription orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the legal and prison 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 are indefensible, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Government Inaction and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said 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 disregard this in the hope that it will go away. Last week, 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 perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
