Britain’s Gaza Spy Plane Scandal: ‘Release The Footage,’ British Victim’s Family Demands.

Father of former Royal Marine killed in Gaza says secret RAF surveillance could hold answers, and evidence of UK complicity.

The father of a British humanitarian aid worker killed by an Israeli drone strike in Gaza has renewed demands for the UK government to release classified surveillance footage captured by British spy planes operating over the besieged enclave.

James ‘Jim’ Henderson, a former Royal Marine commando working with the World Central Kitchen (WCK), was among seven international aid workers killed on 1 April 2024 when Israeli forces struck their clearly marked convoy. Nearly two years later, Henderson’s family says the British state is withholding crucial evidence that could clarify how – and why – their son was killed.

“The reason for not supplying that footage from the Ministry of Defence is a bit of an insult,” Jim’s father, Neil Henderson, told Declassified UK. “I can’t understand how an RAF plane flying over Gaza on the pretext of looking for hostages could possibly threaten British security if that footage were released.”

His comments feature prominently in Britain’s Gaza Spy Flight Scandal, a new documentary released by Declassified UK this week, which lifts the lid on one of the most opaque and controversial military operations carried out by Britain during Israel’s ongoing assault on Gaza.

Hundreds Of Secret Spy Flights Over Gaza:

Since December 2023, successive Conservative and Labour governments have authorised hundreds of British surveillance flights over Gaza, launched from RAF Akrotiri, the UK’s sprawling military base on the Mediterranean island of Cyprus. Officially, the Ministry of Defence (MoD) claims these missions are “solely” to assist in locating hostages held by Hamas.

Yet the scale, secrecy and timing of the flights raise profound questions. Independent flight trackers and investigative journalists estimate that more than 600 missions were flown between December 2023 and October 2025 – averaging one to two sorties per day during the most intense phases of Israel’s bombardment.

Crucially, the RAF has never confirmed that a single hostage was located or rescued as a result of these flights. What the UK has accumulated is an enormous archive of high-resolution imagery and intelligence on Gaza, footage that may include evidence of war crimes, unlawful killings, or direct coordination with Israeli military operations.

‘Release the Footage’

On the day Jim Henderson was killed, an RAF surveillance aircraft was operating over Gaza. The MoD has acknowledged it holds footage from that day but has repeatedly refused to release it, citing national security exemptions.

Neil Henderson rejects that justification outright.

“The equipment they’ve got is high-tech spy plane stuff,” he said. “That would give us a far better understanding of what was happening on the ground. I believe it would prove the Israelis were watching them at the time.”

Henderson says the refusal has compounded the family’s grief and fuelled suspicions of a cover-up. “It feels like the British government is protecting itself – not its own citizens,” he said.

The MoD has similarly stonewalled Freedom of Information requests about surveillance footage from other Israeli attacks that killed British citizens and volunteers, including an airstrike in March 2024 that killed eight UK charity workers from Al-Khair Foundation in Beit Lahia.

Outsourced Spying, Real-Time Intelligence:

One of the most significant revelations in Britain’s Gaza Spy Flight Scandal is the outsourcing of surveillance missions to US defence contractors. The documentary features the first-ever footage of an American spy plane leased by the RAF taking off from Akrotiri en route to Gaza.

Declassified reports that at least 116 additional surveillance missions were carried out by US contractors, including aircraft operated by Sierra Nevada Corporation, beyond those previously acknowledged by the government.

Marketing materials obtained by investigators show these aircraft are equipped with advanced radar and satellite communications systems capable of producing high-resolution imagery and transmitting “perishable intelligence” to mission partners in real time.

This undermines official claims that Britain strictly controls how intelligence is shared.

“If it’s streamed in real time to an operations room, you have no idea how it’s being used,” said Steve Masters, a former RAF technician with 19 years’ service. “They’ve admitted they’re sharing intelligence from these flights in real time. That could be used for hostage rescue – but it could also be used for general target acquisition.”

Asked whether UK intelligence could have been used to target civilians, Masters was blunt: “I don’t think that’s a stretch of anybody’s imagination.”

‘Materially Aiding A Genocide’:

Masters issued a stark warning to the government: “The continuing blockage of this footage does nothing to quell the suspicion that we are materially aiding a genocide. There needs to be accountability, even if that means The Hague.”

Legal experts have repeatedly warned that passing intelligence of military utility to Israel could render the UK a party to the conflict, especially in light of mounting evidence of genocide, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

The International Criminal Court has already issued arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former defence minister Yoav Gallant. Human rights lawyers argue that officials in allied states who knowingly assist such crimes could also face liability.

Palestinians Also Denied The Truth:

British victims are not alone in being denied access to UK surveillance footage. Palestinian survivors have also never seen imagery that may have been captured before major massacres.

This week marks the anniversary of the Nuseirat massacre, in which at least 34 civilians were killed. Declassified reveals that an outsourced RAF spy plane was operating within minutes’ flight of the area hours before the attack.

“How much suffering do Palestinians have to endure before British officials like Keir Starmer and David Lammy realise they are directly complicit?” asked Matthew Stavrinides of Genocide Free Cyprus.

Cyprus: ‘They’re Off On A Death Run’.

The documentary also exposes growing anger in Cyprus, where RAF Akrotiri operates as a colonial-era British enclave just 40 minutes’ flight from Tel Aviv.

Local activist and politician Melanie Steliou described the flights as “heartbreaking and infuriating.”

“The thought that every time a plane leaves, children could die – and they’re taking off from here,” she said. “They’re off on a death run.”

Steliou says she received threatening calls from Sovereign Base Area police after filming near the base, highlighting the intimidation faced by critics. She called for full decolonisation of Cyprus and the closure of British military bases.

“The British Empire never fell,” she said. “It just changed shape.”

Media Silence And Political Evasion:

Despite the scale of the operation, Britain’s mainstream media has largely failed to investigate the spy flights. Analysis shows that none of the UK’s major outlets have conducted a sustained inquiry into the legal, ethical or humanitarian implications of the missions.

Opposition MPs, including Jeremy Corbyn, Kim Johnson, Shockat Adam and Brendan O’Hara, have repeatedly raised concerns in parliament, questioning whether UK intelligence is being used for Israeli military targeting.

The government continues to insist it is not assisting Israel’s war effort. “It would be quite wrong for the British government to assist in the prosecution of this war in Gaza,” Foreign Secretary David Lammy has said. “We are not doing that.”

Yet ministers refuse to explain how intelligence shared in real time can be controlled once it leaves British hands.

Britain Protecting Israeli Interests By Obscuring Justice:

What critics now allege goes beyond passive alignment with Israel and into the realm of active obstruction. By withholding surveillance footage that could clarify civilian killings, Britain is accused of shielding Israel from legal exposure while insulating itself from accusations of complicity.

Human rights lawyers and campaigners increasingly describe the MoD’s refusal to release Gaza surveillance footage as obstruction of justice, a deliberate act that prevents victims, investigators and courts from accessing potentially decisive evidence.

“This is no longer about sensitive intelligence,” said one international criminal lawyer advising civil society groups. “When a state knowingly withholds evidence relevant to alleged war crimes, it crosses a legal threshold. It becomes an enabler of impunity.”

Analysts argue Britain’s actions help Israel maintain a consistent narrative: that mass civilian deaths are tragic mistakes rather than part of a systematic military policy. By keeping raw intelligence classified, London effectively launders Israeli denials through silence.

“The absence of evidence becomes Israel’s defence,” said a UK-based analyst. “And Britain is manufacturing that absence.”

Families of victims say this pattern amounts to a cover-up. “If the footage cleared Israel, it would be released instantly,” Neil Henderson said. “They are hiding it because it doesn’t.”

Campaigners note that the same tactic, delay, secrecy, national security exemptions, has been used historically to shield allies accused of torture, rendition and unlawful killings. Gaza, they say, is the most extreme iteration yet.

Obstruction Of Justice And State Complicity: The Legal Case.

Legal experts argue Britain’s conduct may breach both international humanitarian law and international criminal law, particularly where evidence suppression intersects with knowledge of alleged crimes.

1. Duty To Prevent And Not Aid Genocide

Under the Genocide Convention, states have an affirmative duty not only to refrain from committing genocide, but to prevent and not assist it. Legal scholars note that continuing intelligence support, combined with evidence suppression, may constitute a failure of that duty.

“If a state knows there is a serious risk of genocide and continues to assist the perpetrator while hiding evidence, it is in breach,” said a former UN legal adviser. “Knowledge plus facilitation plus concealment is a dangerous legal triad.”

2. Aiding And Abetting War Crimes

Under Article 25 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court, aiding and abetting requires practical assistance that has a substantial effect on the commission of crimes, with knowledge of the likely consequences.

Former prosecutors argue that real-time intelligence sharing over Gaza meets the threshold of ‘practical assistance’, while the refusal to release footage may demonstrate consciousness of guilt.

“Evidence suppression is not neutral,” said one ICC practitioner. “It can be probative of intent.”

3. Obstruction Of Justice

Obstruction of justice is recognised in both domestic and international legal systems. While the ICC’s Article 70 focuses on interference with court processes, legal experts say pre-emptive evidence suppression by states can still ground liability, particularly where it frustrates foreseeable investigations.

“Britain knows that Gaza is under active investigation by international courts,” said a human rights barrister. “Withholding relevant evidence in that context is not administrative caution; it is obstruction.”

4. State Responsibility And Reparations

Even if individual criminal liability is not immediately established, Britain may still face state responsibility under international law. This includes obligations to disclose evidence, cooperate with investigations, cease wrongful acts and provide reparations.

Victims’ families are now exploring civil claims and judicial review to compel disclosure, arguing that national security exemptions cannot lawfully override the right to truth in cases involving mass civilian harm.

A Demand For Truth And Accountability:

For Neil Henderson, the issue is painfully simple.

“My son served this country,” he said. “And now this country won’t even show us what it knows about how he died.”

As Britain’s secret war in the skies over Gaza is slowly dragged into the light, families of victims, legal experts and campaigners are demanding answers, and warning that silence may yet carry criminal consequences.

The question remains: what is Britain hiding in its Gaza footage, and who is it really protecting?

Final Conclusion: Secrecy As State Policy, Impunity As Outcome.

What now stands exposed is not a marginal intelligence operation but a system of secrecy deliberately maintained to obstruct accountability. Britain’s refusal to release Gaza surveillance footage is no longer plausibly explained by national security. It functions instead as a political shield, one that protects Israel from scrutiny, insulates British officials from legal risk, and denies victims the most basic right to truth.

By continuing surveillance flights, sharing intelligence in real time, outsourcing operations to private US contractors, and then suppressing the evidentiary record, Britain has crossed from passive ally to active participant in a cover-up. This is not merely complicity by association; it is complicity by action and omission.

International law is clear: when a state knows there is a serious risk of genocide or systematic war crimes, it must not assist, facilitate or conceal. Britain has done all three. It has assisted through intelligence cooperation, facilitated through operational infrastructure, and concealed through evidence suppression. Each step deepens legal exposure.

The consequences are not abstract. Aid workers are dead. Palestinian civilians are dead in the tens of thousands. Families, British and Palestinian, are denied justice while Israeli military narratives go unchallenged, untested and unprosecuted.

History shows that cover-ups collapse not because states choose transparency, but because evidence eventually forces its way into the open. Britain can either release the Gaza footage now, cooperate with international investigations, disclose the chain of intelligence sharing, and accept legal scrutiny, or face far graver consequences later, when secrecy itself becomes the crime.

For Neil Henderson and others demanding answers, the question is no longer whether Britain knows what happened in Gaza. It is whether Britain will continue to hide what it knows, and in doing so, decide which lives are worth the protection of law, and which can be erased in silence.

The footage exists. The law exists. What is missing is political will, and that responsibility now sits squarely with Sir Keir Starmer.

As prime minister, Starmer has chosen continuity over accountability: maintaining the surveillance programme, defending intelligence-sharing arrangements, and allowing the Ministry of Defence to block disclosure of evidence central to alleged war crimes. Critics argue that this is not inherited inertia but active endorsement, given repeated opportunities to suspend flights, order disclosure, or submit material to independent or international investigators. And until that changes, Britain’s spy planes over Gaza will stand not as instruments of rescue, but as evidence, waiting to be seen.