In 1981, IRA and other republican prisoners went on 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 by the time of his death. Margaret Thatcher took a hardline public stance. But by the end, behind the scenes, the government was looking for an exit, and public opinion had shifted significantly.
The lives of the Palestine Action-affiliated remand prisoners now on hunger strike are at growing risk. On Friday, two reached day 48 without food. (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 in Surrey. Amu Gib, 30, has also been treated. Three more 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 prisoners are variously on remand for alleged criminal damage, aggravated burglary and violent disorder at a factory for Elbit Systems, an Israeli arms manufacturer, in Filton, near Bristol, and in relation to an alleged break-in at RAF Brize Norton. All will have spent more than a year in prison before trial – much longer than the standard custody limit of six months. Some may not be tried until 2027. Demands include immediate bail, stopping restrictions on their communications and ending the ban on Palestine Action.
Ministers should rethink proscription not because of this hunger strike, but because, as this newspaper has previously maintained, it was an illiberal overreaction. There is a striking contrast 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 of annihilation in Gaza. More than 1,600 arrests linked to support for Palestine Action were made in the three months following the ban’s introduction in July. Huda Ammori, the co-founder of the group, has mounted a legal challenge. But independent reviewers of terrorism laws have anyway argued that proscription orders should be subject to time limits. The government does not need to wait for a high court judge; it should change its mind now.
More urgently, it should address the issue of remand. Failures of the justice and penal systems are leading to increasingly lengthy delays and poor prison conditions. No defendant should wait this long for trial. Such lengthy periods on remand cannot be justified, apart from in the most exceptionally serious cases, where an individual poses an ongoing threat to public safety. Lawyers have pointed out that defendants could be tagged while awaiting trial.
Ministers have said that prisons see around 200 hunger strikes a year and are “very experienced” with them. The government is understandably wary of setting precedents in such cases. But it should not simply ignore this in the hope that it will go away. Last week, Lindsay Hoyle, the Commons speaker, described the failure of David Lammy – deputy prime minister and justice secretary – to reply to MPs’ request for information on the hunger strikers as “totally unacceptable”. Asked about the prisoners at prime minister’s questions, Sir Keir Starmer’s response was perfunctory. The government must engage with the issue and examine the arguments for bail and the questions around prison communication. At present it looks dangerously complacent, given the prisoners’ rapidly deteriorating health.
Do you have an opinion on the issues raised in this article? If you would like to submit a response of up to 300 words by email to be considered for publication in our letters section, please click here.
