🔗 Share this article

During 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners began a hunger strike in Northern Ireland, demanding the restoration of their special category status. Ten would die; remarkably, their leader, Bobby Sands, was voted in as an MP before his death. The then-Prime Minister took a hardline public stance. But by the end, in private, the government sought an exit, and the public mood had shifted significantly.

A Growing Risk to Health

The well-being of the Palestine Action-affiliated detainees awaiting trial now on hunger strike are at increasing risk. Recently, two marked day 48 without food. (By comparison, in 1981, one IRA prisoner – 29-year-old Martin Hurson – died on the 46th day.) Twenty-year-old Qesser Zuhrah is being treated in hospital after she reportedly 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 since called off their protest, one after being hospitalized.

The Circumstances of Imprisonment

The prisoners are being held for alleged criminal damage, serious burglary and public 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 prior to their day in court – far exceeding the standard custody limit. Several may not be face trial until 2027. Demands include prompt release on bail, lifting limits on their communications and ending the proscription on Palestine Action.

Ministers should rethink 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 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 linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the quarter 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 judicial ruling; it should change its mind now.

The Pressing Matter of Remand

More urgently, it should tackle the issue of remand. Shortcomings of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and substandard detention environments. No defendant should wait for such a duration for trial. Extended stays on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases. Legal representatives have noted that defendants could be electronically monitored while waiting for their court date.

Official Complacency and A Call to Engage

Ministers have said that prisons handle around 200 hunger strikes a year and are highly familiar with them. The government is naturally cautious of establishing a precedent. 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 completely unsatisfactory. 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 worryingly unconcerned, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.