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, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. However, ultimately, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed on the 46th day.) The young activist 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. Two others have since called off their protest, one after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged criminal damage, serious 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. Each has already spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
There is a striking contrast between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths 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. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have contended that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should address 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 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 awaiting trial.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
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 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 perfunctory. The government must address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
