In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners initiated a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and the public mood had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Health
The well-being of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without food. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed on the 46th day.) Twenty-year-old Qesser Zuhrah is being treated in hospital after she was said to have collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Three more have abstained from eating for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, is eating only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, a single protester after hospitalisation.
The Circumstances of Detention
The prisoners are being held for alleged vandalism, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – much longer the usual six-month limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the proscription 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 Striking Contrast 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 loss of life of tens of thousands in a war in Gaza. More than 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 argued 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 Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the legal and prison systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be tagged 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 “very experienced” 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. Recently, 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 address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. Currently it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
