During 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, calling for the return of their political status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.
A Growing Risk to Health
The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at growing risk. Last Friday, 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 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 another, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. Two others have since called off their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported criminal damage, aggravated burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the usual six-month limit. Some may not be face trial 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 Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction
There is a glaring disparity 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. More than 1,600 arrests associated with support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Independent reviewers of terrorism laws have argued that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Remand
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Failures of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue
Ministers have said that prisons handle 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 hope 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.
