In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten men ultimately perished; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Lives
The well-being of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Last Friday, two marked day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died 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. Three more have refused food 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 hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Imprisonment
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. Each has already spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the proscription on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.
A Striking Contrast in Official Reaction
There is a striking contrast between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have contended 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
With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Authorities have stated 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 fade. Last week, the failure of the Justice Secretary to reply to MPs’ requests for information was described as completely unsatisfactory. When questioned on 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’ sharply declining health.
