🔗 Share this article

During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike within the Maze Prison, calling for the return of their political status. Ten would die; extraordinarily, their leader, Bobby Sands, had been elected as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. However, ultimately, in private, the government sought an resolution, and the public mood had shifted significantly.

An Escalating Danger to Lives

The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners currently refusing food are at growing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without food. (By comparison, 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 reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. 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 being hospitalized.

The Context of Imprisonment

The prisoners are variously on remand for reported vandalism, aggravated burglary and public disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Several may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and revoking the proscription on Palestine Action.

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

A Glaring Disparity in Government Response

There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its lack of action and seeming apathy when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. Over 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 contended that proscription orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.

The Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention

With greater immediacy, it should tackle the issue of remand. Failures of the justice and penal systems are leading to ever-longer waiting times and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Lawyers have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.

Government Inaction and A Call to Engage

Ministers have said 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 ignore 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 completely unsatisfactory. When asked about the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.