A couple of pertinent points from the Antipodes which may be outside the 'norm' for those posting with UK/EASA rules ingrained in their DNA.
We have a variation of commercial ops called 'airwork/aerial work' which has a lower standard of accountability. A search or a rescue would fall within the Airwork category. We also have a term 'mercy flight' where life is at risk, allowing variations in the rules and regs.
Finally we are reading a news report: how accurate is that? There is little point in debating the minutiae of words used in that report since it is unlikely that the journalist has the faintest idea how his terminology can be misinterpreted by the aviation community.
I see a responsible action by a pilot with a temporary (medical) licence suspension who went along in an advisory capacity on a flight with another pilot PIC, and then took over the controls to ensure that a critical part of the mission was accomplished to get essential personnel on the ground to save a life. The journo's use of 'co-pilot' should have no value since it is most likely that he (the guy in the RH seat) was the pilot for the flight. We don't use 'commander' and other such highfalutin terms down here
