British servicemen who filmed hundreds of interrogation sessions at a secret prison near Basra which has been described as "the UK's Abu Ghraib" may be guilty of war crimes, the high court heard today.

Evidence of the alleged systematic and brutal mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners at the facility, operated by a military intelligence unit called the Joint Forces Interrogation Team (JFIT), has been submitted during proceedings brought by more than 200 former inmates.

Further footage of the interrogation of a suspected insurgent brought into JFIT in April 2007 emerged in court today, showing the individual being abused and intimidated, subjected to sensory deprivation and threatened with execution. The footage also shows him being led out of the interrogation cell, wearing ear muffs and blackened goggles, to be "taken for a quick run", before being brought back a minute later.

In statements submitted to the court, this man and others say that during these interludes they were forced to run in zigzags across an assault course while wearing blackened goggles, and being kicked and beaten with rifle butts.

The court has been told that there is evidence that detainees were starved, deprived of sleep, subjected to sensory deprivation and threatened with execution at JFIT. It also received allegations that prisoners were beaten, forced to kneel in stressful positions for up to 30 hours at a time, and that some men detained by British forces were subjected to electric shocks.

Some of the 222 men bringing proceedings say they were subject to sexual humiliation by women soldiers, while others allege that they were held for days in brightly-lit cells as small as one metre square.

Michael Fordham QC, counsel for the men, told the court: "The question needs to be asked, if these very serious allegations are true ... are these British war crimes?"

Lawyers for the former JFIT inmates say there needs to be a public inquiry, to discover what happened and to investigate the extent to which the abuses were systemic, as well as to establish the lessons to be learned. Today's proceedings were intended to force such an inquiry. In a related case, around 250 Iraqi people detained by British forces are seeking damages for injuries they say they suffered.

The Ministry of Defence says a public inquiry would be costly and unnecessary, and that a team of investigators should be permitted to continue its own investigation into the allegations, which it insists remain "unproven".

The men's lawyers say that the MoD's investigation is expected to answer to a branch of the military, the provost marshal(army), which was responsible for the detention of the 222 men – although not their interrogation – and that an investigation by the military of the military would fail to meet the UK's obligations under the European convention on human rights.

It is unclear why the interrogators filmed themselves, unless they were preparing training material for use at their headquarters in Chicksands, Bedfordshire. There is reason to believe that the camera is being operated by someone outside the room. During a preliminary hearing, the court heard that a total of 1,253 interrogation sessions were recorded.

The film disclosed today shows the suspected insurgent, a 30-year-old mechanic identified by his lawyers as "Hanif", being interrogated at the British base at Shaiba, south west of Basra.

Throughout repeated sessions, the interrogators attempt to force Hanif to confess to taking part in a mortar attack on a British base several days earlier, which he denies. He is asked no questions about future insurgent operations.

Asked why he has been crying in his cell, Hanif replies that he is ill. Asked why he cannot stand still, Hanif replies that his back hurts. The interrogator replies: "Good. I'm glad. I hope you die of cancer. I hope your kids die." The interrogator adds: "You have seen the doctor, and he says there is nothing wrong with you."

Most of the former inmates involved in the case say they were examined by British military doctors, some of them women, before interrogation. They say that these physicians took no interest in the injuries which had been inflicted during beatings prior to examination.

In a statement to the high court, Hanif says: "I was led in a zigzag fashion, running forwards and backwards and side-to-side. Inside the medical tent, the goggles and ear mufflers were removed and the handcuffs cut my wrists. I was in such pain that my legs couldn't hold me and I fell to the floor. The soldiers grabbed me and slapped me on the back of my neck and lifted me up. I told the doctor I was exhausted and in pain. The doctor simply wiped the blood with some cotton wool. She didn't offer to treat me in any other way. They asked me to sign a piece of paper in English to say I had been checked. I felt they would punish me even more, so I signed."

Later on, he says: "The interrogator said they had brought my wife and my mother. He told me: 'If you don't confess we are going to arrest all your brothers and they will be jailed for life and you will never see them again, and your mother and wife will be raped.' This terrified me."

Between interrogations, he says, he was forced to run while wearing the blackened goggles and earmuffs. "The ground was uneven, there were gradients upwards and downwards, and there were objects on the floor. Because I could not see them I would often fall over them. After a number of these sessions I learned they were wooden goods pallets. This forced running happened before almost every interrogation. It would also happen at random times, when I was trying to sleep."

On six occasions, he says, he was taken out of interrogation sessions and beaten by soldiers wielding wooden sticks. "I was helpless to stop them. I would try to fall to the floor to protect myself from the blows, but they would always hit me where my arms were not. I would try to avoid the blows, but without seeing them it was impossible."

Hanif says he was deprived of sleep for the first 10 days of his detention, that the beatings began after three days, and he was subjected to sensory deprivation for around three weeks. After seven months he was released without any sort of charge being pressed against him.

He says that he was particularly disturbed by the sight deprivation. "It causes me a lot of suffering to recall this, even today."

The hearing continues tomorrow.