In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow 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 before his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Health
The well-being of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she was said to have collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Another three have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two 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, and in relation to an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – 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 revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider the banning order not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.
A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and apparent indifference 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 argued that proscription 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 Urgent Issue of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Failures of the legal and prison systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers 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 understandably wary of setting precedents. But it should not simply disregard this in the hope that it will fade. Recently, 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 review the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
