In 1981, Irish Republican Army and fellow prisoners began 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. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, 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 detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (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 was said to have collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Three more have refused food 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 being hospitalized.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, and in relation to an reported intrusion at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer the standard custody limit. Some may not be tried until 2027. Their requests consist of prompt release on bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and revoking the ban on Palestine Action.
The government ought to reconsider 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 glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction 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 banning orders ought to have time limits. The government does not need to wait for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.
The Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention
With greater immediacy, 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 for such a duration for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, except for 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
Authorities have stated that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents. But it should not simply disregard this in the hope that it will go away. Last week, 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 engage with the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
