🔗 Share this article

During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their special category status. Ten men ultimately perished; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. However, ultimately, in private, the government sought an exit, and the public mood had changed dramatically.

An Escalating Danger to Lives

The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at growing risk. Recently, two marked day 48 without food. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed 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 abstained from eating for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. A further two have now ended their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.

The Context of Imprisonment

The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged vandalism, serious 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. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the usual six-month limit. Some may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.

Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because it was an illiberal overreaction.

A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction

There is a striking contrast between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the deaths 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 should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.

The Urgent Issue of Remand

More urgently, it should tackle 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 this long for trial. Extended stays on remand are indefensible, except for in the most exceptionally serious cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored 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 highly familiar with them. The government is understandably wary of establishing a precedent. But it should not simply disregard this in the expectation that it will go away. 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 cursory. The government must address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.