During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, calling for the return of their special category 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, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died on the 46th day.) Twenty-year-old Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Three more have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
The Context of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for alleged vandalism, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the usual six-month limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending 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 Striking Contrast in Official Reaction
There is a striking contrast between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its lack of action 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 three months following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have contended that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should address 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. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.
Government Inaction and An Appeal for Dialogue
Ministers have said that prisons handle 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 perfunctory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
