🔗 Share this article

During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government sought an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.

A Growing Risk to Lives

The well-being of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, 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 likewise received medical care. 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 since called off their protest, one after hospitalisation.

The Context of Detention

The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged vandalism, aggravated 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 before trial – far exceeding the usual six-month limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.

The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.

A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction

There is a glaring disparity between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its inaction and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict 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 should not await for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.

The Pressing Matter of Remand

More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Failures of the legal and prison systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.

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 naturally cautious of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply ignore 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 examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.