UK Foreign Office whistleblowing policy under fire over arms sales to Israel

Lawyers demand more protection for informants after diplomat resigns in protest at approach to Gaza-Israel war

A protest by Oxfam against Britain supplying weapons to Israel, in London in July. Getty Images

Live updates: Follow the latest news on Israel-Gaza

Just a handful of British Foreign Office staff have used the service's whistleblowing policy to complain about the government's sale of arms to Israel despite reports of hundreds signalling anger over the UK's policy.

Sources told The National that fewer than five staff have registered a complaint over Britain's policy on Israel and Palestine as the department faces questions over the integrity of its whistleblowing systems following the resignation of Mark Smith, a career civil servant based at the British embassy in Ireland.

Mr Smith wrote in his resignation letter that his concerns regarding the legality of arms sales that he raised “at every level” of the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office were “disregarded”.

In May it was reported that around 300 staff from the Foreign Office had written to the Foreign Secretary at the time, David Cameron, calling for the government’s legal advice on Israel to be made public and questioning its action and policy in relation to Gaza.

Lawyers say the UK’s whistleblowing system needs to be overhauled and have criticised the Foreign Office for failing to act on whistleblowing tip-offs.

Civilians ordered to flee eastern Rafah as Israel begins invasion – in pictures

In Mr Smith's resignation letter, which he sent to colleagues, he criticised the service's whistleblowing policy.

“I have raised this at every level in the organisation, including through an official whistleblowing investigation, and received nothing more than ‘thank you, we have noted your concerns’,” he wrote.

“It is with sadness that I resign after a long career in the diplomatic service, however I can no longer carry out my duties in the knowledge that this department may be complicit in war crimes.”

The Foreign Office previously came under scrutiny after it dismissed whistleblower Josie Stewart after she passed on information about serious failings in the government’s Afghan evacuation in 2021, and about Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s apparent decision to prioritise the evacuation of staff from an animal charity.

She took her case to a tribunal in May and is still awaiting a decision.

Officials say the UK's policy of providing arms to Israel under its long-standing licensing rules has not changed pending the outcome of a government review instigated by the Foreign Secretary David Lammy.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer spoke to his Israeli counterpart Benjamin Netanyahu on Tuesday, reiterating that the UK was steadfast in its support for Israel’s right to self defence, and would continue to work with partners to uphold regional security.

Barrister Paul Genney, who has dealt with cases at the Guantanamo Bay US detention camp, told The National the government has failed Mr Smith and should be supporting whistleblowers. He said the government needs to be held to account over this and the system needs overhauling as it is not fit for purpose.

“This shows that as soon as someone tries to do the right thing there is no one there to defend them,” he said.

“It seems to be that whistleblowing is a fundamental right but without any power. The right to whistleblow is a duty, but when you do it and you look around for support there is none there.

“People think when they are doing it they will get ministerial, government and public support but they do not get it. It never happens and you get scandals like the [contaminated] blood scandal or the Post Office [Horizon IT] scandal.

“Instead of these people getting applauded, they get persecuted. The whistleblowing system doesn’t work and the government should be doing far more to support these people.

“They take all the risk when the government just buries its head. These are important issues and should be scrutinised properly and the government needs to be held to account and investigate them properly. Presently, this shows the system is not fit for purpose and needs an overhaul.”

However, he said the case of arms sales poses specific challenges. “The difficulty is trying to find out which weapons have been used in which atrocity. It has been difficult to prove,” he said.

“It is very difficult to trace what has been involved and in which circumstances. [Mr Smith] needs to be listened to and he has a public duty to expose this and it is in everyone’s interest to have this out in the open. It needs to be investigated properly.”

Catherine Hobby, a senior lecturer in human rights law and workplace conflict at the University of East London, told The National that “reform is important and much needed”.

Solicitor Rachel Di Clemente, of Hudgell Solicitors, said Mr Smith’s case was concerning as he would have had to have carefully considered the information he was disclosing to be in the public interest, relating to either potential criminal offences, health and safety dangers, environmental damage, miscarriages of justice or legal breaches, under the Public Interest Disclosure Act before taking the action he did.

“It is concerning to hear that Mr Smith has raised concerns and has, as yet, seen little evidence of investigation or action,” she told The National.

“At a time when the existing whistleblowing laws are already under much scrutiny, and subject to a recent review by the government, this is a case right under their noses which will hopefully not go ignored.

“Whistleblowing is a hugely important process which can help ensure wrongdoing is exposed and ultimately stopped. Hopefully this doesn’t prove to be another example of someone being brave enough to speak out only to find themselves ignored by the very people that should be acting upon this disclosure.”

Whistleblower Ms Stewart is hoping her case will help pave the way for legislative reform and says the lack of independent avenues of redress constrains civil servants from being able to expose issues in the public interest.

“I want to help rebuild the sanctity of truth in government,” she told Prospect magazine. “Civil servants need whistleblower protection as much as, if not more than, workers in any other sector. But, at the moment, it’s not clear that they have it.

“I believe that a new statutory basis should be established for the civil service, introducing a secondary duty to uphold the public interest alongside the existing duty to the government of the day. To operationalise this, the leadership of the civil service should be made accountable to either parliament or to an independent standards body.”

In Mr Smith’s case he has said the Foreign Office “may be complicit in war crimes”. Images of his resignation email sent to colleagues were posted online on Sunday, with Mr Smith writing there was “no justification for the UK's continued arms sales to Israel”.

He said he had “written to the Foreign Secretary informing him of my resignation and urging him to urgently review the UK approach to the situation in Gaza”.

“Each day we witness clear and unquestionable examples of war crimes and breaches of international humanitarian law in Gaza perpetrated by the State of Israel,” he wrote in the resignation email.

He also accused the UK government of failing to have a “robust and transparent” arms exports licensing regime.

The National has asked the Public and Commercial Services union for comment.

An FCDO spokesperson said that while it did not comment on individual cases, the “government is committed to upholding international law”.

“We have made clear that we will not export items if they might be used to commit or facilitate a serious violation of international humanitarian law,” the spokesperson said.

After taking office last month, Mr Lammy ordered a legal review of whether UK-issued arms export licences to Israel were at risk of facilitating breaches of international humanitarian law.

“We will provide an update as soon as that review process has been completed,” the FCDO said in its statement.

Mr Lammy has previously indicated that there would be no “blanket ban” on arms sales to Israel, but that he would “consider the issues in relation to offensive weapons in Gaza”.