The British Foreign Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) is accused of covering up over £22 million of aid to Palestinian terror-linked groups. Multiple similar cases raise questions over transparency and the misuse of aid.
NGO Monitor is a research institute analyzing the finances of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). In 2021, they submitted a Freedom of Information (FOI) to the FCDO, requesting the names of funding recipients of a £22 million Palestinian aid program in 2019-2020, led by the Norwegian Refugee Council (NRC). The FCDO rejected the request. It took over three years until NGO Monitor was granted a hearing by the Information Commission (IC) in 2024. The IC ruled that although public interest was strong, the potential damage to international relations outweighed the justification for disclosure.
NGO Monitor suspects NRC has ties to terrorism. NRC worked with the Union of Agricultural Work Committees (UAWC), described by a U.S. Government Agency as the “agricultural arm” of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a designated terrorist organization. In 2019, their activity included a bombing operation that murdered an Israeli teenager.
In 2022, the UK Government gave £4.6 million to the NRC, which distributed £2 million to other organizations. In an Interview, Anne Herzberg, the legal advisor of NGO Monitor who worked on the case, said, “The government witness testified they do not do vetting of subcontractor NGO grantees. This failure leaves UK aid susceptible to diversion, or to go to actors who are not appropriate aid partners.” Herzberg continued, “The lack of transparency is very damaging as this prevents the public knowing what is being done with their taxpayer money.”
NGO Monitor also accused NRC of using lawfare tactics, meaning to exploit international law as a weapon against Israel. This includes NRC’s attempts to clog the Israeli system by inundating it with legal cases. As stated by an NRC-affiliated lawyer, they use “every possible legal measure to disrupt the Israeli judicial system…as many cases as possible are registered and as many cases as possible are appealed to increase the workload of the courts and the Supreme Court, to such an extent that there will be a blockage."
After approaching NRC and asking what requirements and systems are in place to ensure international aid funds do not fall into the wrong hands. NRC said it “complies with laws and regulations, screens all potential partners against sanctions and terrorism lists and has policies in place to ensure that our aid reaches those in need of assistance. Governments who provide funding to NRC have strict reporting requirements to ensure that funds are only used as intended.”
If these systems are working as intended, why would the FCDO go to such lengths to avoid transparency?
Herzberg described how the FCDO claimed that publishing “the names of NGO grantees would cause friction in its relationship with Israel.” Why? Herzberg posits, “We are aware the Palestinian Authority (PA) has actively participated in the NRC project, funded by the FCDO. No doubt it would be quite embarrassing to the FCDO and the PA, were the details to become public. But embarrassment is not an excuse. If they have to hide what they are doing from Israel and the British public, there is clearly something highly problematic.”
Also accused of a sinister cover-up was The Department for International Development (DFID), which later merged into the FCDO. In 2018, UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI), submitted an FOI about British aid allegedly being used to pay salaries of convicted Palestinian terrorists. It involved the Palestinian Authority’s Martyr Fund, termed "pay for slay." DFID refused UKLFI’s FOI request, but in 2019, The Information Commissioner ordered the department to disclose reports. Reportedly, between 2008 and 2015, Britain gave the PA treasury £430.5 million. It was not earmarked, yet 8% of the PA’s budget went to fund salaries for convicted terrorists, including murderers.
Jonathan Turner, the UK Lawyers for Israel (UKLFI) director who worked on the case, said the FCDO was “not at all” successful in auditing aid to the West Bank and Gaza. “Until 2015, the main British grant to the PA was paid into their main accounts, from which money was transferred to pay salaries to terrorists and their families – therefore this money came out of the same pot which the FCDO main grant was paid.”
In 2023, two pro-Israel organizations, We Believe in Israel and B'nai B'rith, also submitted an FOI to the FCDO. Responding to the British Dee family’s murder in the West Bank, the FOI asked if British taxes were going toward “pay for slay.” The FCDO refused, stating concern for the UK’s relationship with the PA. The Information Commission overruled the FCDO. The disclosure showed the UK funding PA £25 million in 2015 and then nothing until 2022.
The requesting organizations stated, "The FCDO's response to our joint FOI request is remarkably similar to what sector colleagues have also experienced. Even when there are no lawful grounds to refuse disclosure, doing just that still appears to be their default action, as if it were in a bid to dodge scrutiny over policy implementation in Israel and the West Bank. Sadly, we do not expect any significant change of position in the near or mid-future."
Turner said while UK law regarding FOIs “is reasonable, the problem is procedures adopted by the tribunals and courts for dealing with disputes favors the government.” Because of this, Turner argued “Auditing has clearly been a failure in Gaza – massive amounts of aid have plainly been diverted to terrorism. We believe substantial sums have been diverted to terrorism in the West Bank. In any case, the provision of aid to the Palestinian Authority means some of its legitimate expenses enable it to spend other money financing terrorists.”
The FCDO when asked whether it acknowledges the co-opting of international aid in the Gaza Strip. A spokesperson said, “UK aid is subject to rigorous oversight to ensure it reaches the most vulnerable with maximum impact, and to minimize risks of diversion. Absolutely no funding goes to Hamas and our aid is targeted towards providing vulnerable civilians with essential and lifesaving assistance.”
Herzberg emphasized the cover-up is symptomatic of the bigger issues at hand: a failure of the humanitarian aid system, since Hamas took control of Gaza in 2007. How is this related to the October 7 attack?
“There has been a conspiracy of silence by the international community regarding diversion of billions of dollars of humanitarian aid to Hamas. This omerta has extended to the Hamas capture of UNRWA; the commandeering of hospitals, schools and mosques to store weaponry and launch rockets; building a massive network of terror tunnels in residential areas for Hamas fighters. This conspiracy continued after October 7, where hostages were held in private homes, or held captive in Gaza's hospitals.
Anna StanleyRather than confront their own failures and complicity, many donor countries, UN agencies and aid organizations have launched an information war against Israel, continuing to cover up their own negligence and potential criminal liability for what has happened.”
Herzberg ended, “What is shocking to me is that so many countries simply want the system to continue as before, when clearly it requires a complete overhaul, with new mechanisms to deliver humanitarian aid.”
- Anna Stanley has recently left the UK Foreign Office to make Aliyah. She is a Philosophy graduate, alumni of the Counter Extremism Group Young Leaders in National Security Fellowship and an open-source intelligence analyst