🔗 Share this article

In 1981, IRA and other republican 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. The then-Prime Minister 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 Lives

The well-being of the activists linked to Palestine Action detainees awaiting trial currently refusing food are at increasing risk. Last Friday, 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 has been admitted 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, is eating only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, one after hospitalisation.

The Circumstances of Detention

The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, a defense contractor for Israel, and in relation to an reported intrusion 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 face trial until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and ending the proscription on Palestine Action.

The government ought to reconsider the banning order not due to this hunger strike, but because it was an disproportionate and repressive measure.

A Glaring Disparity in Official Reaction

There is a striking contrast between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its inaction and seeming apathy when faced with the deaths of tens of thousands during a conflict in Gaza. More than 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 argued that banning orders ought to have time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.

The Pressing Matter of Pre-Trial Detention

More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings 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, except for in the most extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.

Official Complacency and An Appeal for Dialogue

Ministers have said that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is naturally cautious of setting precedents. But it should not simply disregard this in the hope that it will go away. Recently, the failure of the Justice Secretary to reply to MPs’ requests for information was described as completely unsatisfactory. When questioned on the prisoners, the Prime Minister’s response was perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail. Currently it looks worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ sharply declining health.