🔗 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 adopted a publicly uncompromising position. But by the end, in private, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.

A Growing Risk to Lives

The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners currently refusing food are at growing risk. Recently, two reached day 48 without food. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died on the 46th day.) The young activist Qesser Zuhrah is being treated in hospital after she reportedly collapsed at HMP Bronzefield. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Another three 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, one after hospitalisation.

The Circumstances of Imprisonment

The prisoners are variously on remand for alleged vandalism, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, as well as an alleged break-in 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. Demands include immediate bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.

The government ought to reconsider proscription not due to 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 draconian zeal in this regard and its inaction 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 quarter following the ban’s introduction. Expert assessors of terrorism laws have contended that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a judicial ruling; it should reverse its decision now.

The Pressing Matter of Remand

With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Failures 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. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.

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 ignore this in the hope 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 cursory. The government must address the issue and examine the arguments for bail. Currently it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.