In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, calling for the return of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government sought an resolution, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the activists linked to Palestine Action remand prisoners currently refusing food are at growing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without food. (By comparison, 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 likewise received medical care. Another three have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. A further two have since called off their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged vandalism, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to an alleged break-in 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. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Government Response
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. Over 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 contended that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings 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. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.
Government Inaction 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 establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore this in the expectation that it will fade. 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’ sharply declining health.