🔗 Share this article

In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, calling for the return of their special category status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government sought an exit, and public opinion had changed dramatically.

A Growing Risk to Lives

The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Last Friday, two reached day 48 without sustenance. (For context, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – succumbed 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 abstained from eating for more than 40 days and one other, who has diabetes, consumes food only every other day. Two others have now ended their protest, a single protester after being hospitalized.

The Circumstances of Detention

The prisoners are being held for reported vandalism, serious burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, as well as 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. Some may not be tried until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the ban 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 Striking Contrast in Government Response

There is a glaring disparity between the government’s severe enthusiasm in this regard and its lack of action and apparent indifference when faced with the loss of life of tens of thousands during a conflict 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 contended that banning orders should be subject to time limits. The government should not await for a high court judge; it should reverse its decision now.

The Urgent Issue of Remand

With greater immediacy, it should address the issue of remand. Shortcomings 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 extraordinarily grave cases. Legal representatives have pointed out that defendants could be electronically monitored while awaiting trial.

Government Inaction and An Appeal for Dialogue

Authorities have stated that prisons handle 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. Recently, 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 perfunctory. The government must address the issue and review the arguments for bail. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.