During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners initiated a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, demanding the restoration of their political status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
A Growing Risk to Health
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated 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 – succumbed on the 46th day.) Twenty-year-old Qesser Zuhrah has been admitted in hospital after she reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has likewise received medical care. Three more have refused food for more than 40 days and another, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, one after hospitalisation.
The Context of Detention
The prisoners are being held 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. Each has already spent more than a year in prison prior to their day in court – much longer the usual six-month limit. Some may not be face trial until 2027. Their requests consist of prompt release on bail, stopping restrictions 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 Government Response
There is a glaring disparity between the government’s draconian zeal in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. Over 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors 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 Pre-Trial Detention
More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the legal and prison systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand are indefensible, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be tagged while waiting for their court date.
Official Complacency and A Call to Engage
Authorities have stated that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents. 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 “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. At present it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.
