In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in 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 public opinion had shifted significantly.
An Escalating Danger to Health
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two marked day 48 without food. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died 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. Three more have refused food for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for alleged vandalism, serious burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, 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 usual six-month limit. Several 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 Official Reaction
There is a striking contrast 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 during a conflict in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have contended that proscription orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
The Urgent Issue of Remand
With greater immediacy, it should address 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. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.
Government Inaction and A Call to Engage
Ministers have said that prisons see 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 expectation 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 questioned on 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 dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
