Recent News

"The law has been broken, self determination has not been respected, human rights have been violated. Mauritius, is entitled to exercise control, sovereignty if you like, over these islands, as rapidly as possible. Faced with that, I suspect the United Kingdom will say to itself, what resistance can we put up to moving forward, and particularly in the context of Brexit, as the United Kingdom finds itself a little bit isolated in the world."

Philippe Sands KC, Mauritius Counsel at the International Court of Justice and ITLOS

LATEST NEWS

23 Nov 2025

The Chagos Treaty Debate in Parliament

A Survey of Chagossian Views - by the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee

Background

On 19 November 2025 the House of Lords International Relations and Defence Committee (IRDC) published an online survey (Link to Survey) to gather views from the Chagossian community about how they view the UK’s Agreement with Mauritius concerning the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia.

The IRDC was invited by the UK Government and the main opposition party to gather views from Chagossians because a Bill implementing the Agreement is currently being debated in Parliament. Members of the House of Lords are keen to hear Chagossian perspectives on the Agreement before considering the Bill further.

The IRDC announcement recognises that “a short online survey has its limitations and cannot capture the full diversity of the Chagossian experience. However, we really want to hear what Chagossians think within the window we have been given for the survey. We must report on our findings by 18 December, in time for the next stage of the Bill. Because we need time to read and analyse the answers, we are asking for responses by 5pm (UK time) on 1 December.”

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Flawed, Open to Abuse, and Potentially Unrepresentative

Analysis

One must have considerable sympathy with the IRDC. They have had this foisted upon them together with an unrealistic timeframe, and it seems without due consideration of the difficulties involved. Nonetheless, it appears that the IRDC sought no independent advice from a Chagossian perspective as to the content of the survey or the manner in which it is to be conducted. As a result, there are a number of potential flaws and shortcomings which will be discussed below.

Time Period

The effective time period for the completion of the survey is barely more than one week. All responses are required by 5pm (UK time) on Monday 1 December 2025. This is likely to be unrealistic for some participants.

Literacy and IT Access

The survey must be completed online by an individual. There is no provision for submissions by letter, e-mail or other hard copy nor for a collective submission from any Chagossian Community Group such as the Chagos Refugees Group (CRG), Seychellois Chagossians Committee, or UK Groups.

The survey presumes that:

Respondents can read and write English, and whilst translations of the questions are also available in a separate document in French and Creole (This would need to be printed out for ease of use whilst using the online survey), the online form requires all answers to be given in English.
Respondents have ready access to a computer with internet connection whilst completing the survey which must be done in one sitting.

Literacy and the lack of IT access is known to be a particular problem for Mauritian Chagossians and may also present some difficulties for Seychellois Chagossians and others.

When the FCDO conducted a paper consultation with Chagossians in 2015 the British High Commissioner in Mauritius, who forwarded the completed forms to London, remarked: "Many of them appear to have been filled in by the same hand (a necessary reflection of poor literacy rates and an inability to read or write in English).”

Lack of provision for Community Input

Despite the literacy problems, the IRDC has not considered the possibility of collective input from Chagossian groups who may wish to hold public meetings to explain the survey to their members and collate their input for submission. This is a major oversight particularly for Mauritian Chagossian groups where important matters have been dealt with in this way in the past. Indeed, it is understood that the CRG have called a General Assembly Meeting on 29/30 November for this purpose.

The Survey Questions

The survey questions are reproduced in more detail below.

There are no direct questions such as "Do you support the Treaty?" but rather the survey seeks to gather views on:

Resettlement
Financial Support and
Environmental Protection and Fishing Rights.

Hopefully therefore respondents will not merely express support for, or rejection of the Treaty but only provide constructive input. Nonetheless the survey does not prevent responses which are polarised to express support or opposition to the Treaty. It must be hoped that responses are given in good faith and also with a reasonable grasp of the facts.

Unfortunately, UK Press coverage, actions of certain lobby groups, and members of both the House of Commons and the House of Lords have spread misinformation and pursued an anti-Mauritius agenda, with the intention of wrecking UK domestic legislation implementing the Treaty. As a result, the atmosphere surrounding the discussion of the Treaty whether in Parliament or in public has been hostile and toxic with the result that there has been much misleading information in the public domain.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A recent flawed survey

An example of this is a survey which has been widely quoted during a recent debate in the House of Lords on 18 November, by Lord Callanan, Lord Hannan, Lord Lilley, Baroness Foster, and Baroness Hoey.

This survey appears to have been a collaboration of the Friends of the British Overseas Territories (FOTBOT) and Great British PAC. It claims 3,389 responses worldwide (said to be 34% of the global Chagossian diaspora) and gives highly improbable outcomes, including that 99.16% Chagossian respondents backed remaining British (Conservative Post article).

Those citing it should have been aware that the survey questions were so heavily loaded as to make the outcome utterly unreliable. For example:

Question 10: What do you want the outcome to be for the Chagos Archipelago?

Respondents were given only one of two options: (1) Self determination and Remain British, or (2) Sovereignty transfer to the Mauritian Government?

Thus, if the respondent wanted to be afforded a right to self-determination then he/she would have to also opt to remain British. Two entirely separate issues have been conflated to produce a contrived result.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Biased Questions in the IRDC Survey

Furthermore some questions in the IRDC survey also show bias, perhaps inadvertently, which is not appropriate. For example, in examining whether individual Chagossians wish to resettle, an initial question is asked:

“How confident are you that Mauritius will support Chagossians to resettle on the outer islands?”

This is despite the fact that there is no evidence that Mauritius will not support resettlement, quite the contrary, the Mauritian Government has set aside funds for resettlement in its last 6 annual budgets and consistently said it will facilitate this in recent years. So why raise it, except to sow doubts in the minds of respondents. It is an entirely unnecessary precursor to the resettlement question which could have been neutrally phrased:

Given that Mauritius supports resettlement of Chagossians on the Outer Islands how likely are you to take up this opportunity yourself?

Lack of Information

Respondents are asked for their views on employment on the US Base on Diego Garcia despite being provided with no information as to what is involved. For example, the US does not permit families to accompany workers. Neither are the rates of pay and accommodation likely to be comparable to what British Chagossians in particular have come to accept as the norm. These are factors which are likely to be a major considerations for Chagossians before reaching any decision.

Validation of Survey responses

The online survey gives complete anonymity and repeatedly asks respondents not to provide any identifying information. Initial questions are designed to capture information on (1) Main country of residence, (2) Whether or not born in Chagos. Respondents can even answer “Prefer not to say” to both these questions. If they do so in the latter case or if they were not born in the islands, they are invited to say what their link to Chagos is.

There is no age restriction or requirement to provide age. Responses may therefore be legitimately submitted by children (however young) and adults alike.

Crucially there is no mechanism to prevent multiple submissions by the same person, and nothing to prevent fraudulent submissions either by Chagossians or any other individual.

This represents an apparent lack of oversight.

Past Consultations and Surveys, Anonymity and Numbers of Responses

Past consultations and surveys with Chagossians alert us to the very considerable challenges involved. Public and private meetings between the Foreign Office and Chagossian groups in Manchester and Crawley in the 2010s and when KPMG conducted a Feasibility Study in 2015 were rarely productive. There were language difficulties (Chagossian Creole, French, English), cultural difficulties, economic and social chasms, and distrust of authority particularly for the FCDO and Government. Officials and consultants were badly prepared and ill-informed and 'fled' back to the safety of Whitehall. They consistently misunderstood this community and the problems that it faced.

Following the KPMG Resettlement Study, the FCDO conducted a survey in 2015 “to understand the demand for resettlement from Chagossians”. This was held over a 12-week period from 4 August to 27 October 2015. A paper form contained 17 questions most of which could be answered by a simple Yes/No. A total of 837 Chagossians participated - 561 from Mauritius, 81 Seychelles, 180 UK, and a further 11 elsewhere. Participants were required to give their name, address and age. A full list of those participating is held by the FCDO. Lack of anonymity did not appear to discourage participation.

The problem of misuse of the survey due to anonymity will always be persistent. For example, none of the questions in the survey have the capacity to reveal whether a respondent is truly Chagossian or not.

The 2015 survey may serve as a possible benchmark for the number of genuine responses that can be expected. Also recently there has been a "Chagossian Statement of Self-Determination" dated 17 Nov 2025 containing the names of 650 supporters in the UK (https://conservativepost.co.uk/chagossians-urge-uk-government-to-halt-chagos-deal-and-uphold-their-right-to-self-determination/). This appears to be a credible expansion from the 180 participants in 2015 given numbers of Chagossians arriving in the UK in the last 10 years, and proof in the form of names is available. By comparison the recent survey by the Friends of the British Overseas Territories (FOTBOT) and Great British PAC mentioned above cannot be validated and produces results which seem improbable.

The Output from the Survey

It is difficult to forecast how the IRDC intend to use the data they are collecting. If it intended to be a representative poll then the lack of validation of responses means that this will be unreliable and any attempt on statistical representation of the results invalid, for example an invalid conclusion might be a statement that: ‘80% of the respondents were not confident that Mauritius would support resettlement on the Outer Islands’.

Alternatively if this is only a collation of ‘views’, we may either see a wide variation if individuals give genuinely independent submissions, but more likely there will be consultation and discussions prior to submission and similar responses will emerge.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Representative polls or surveys are often referred to as ‘scientific polls’ - a method of measuring public opinion through structured surveys that use statistical techniques to ensure accuracy and representativeness. Such an approach enables researchers to gather data about the preferences and beliefs of a sample population, which can then be generalized to the larger population.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Final Thoughts

We have seen the lengths that organisations such as the Great British PAC, the Friends of the British Overseas Territories, Reform, and the Conservative Party have gone to in order to discredit the Treaty and malign Mauritius. Sad to say even many on the Opposition Benches in the House of Lords are susceptible to the misinformation that abounds and have been equally vituperative. When such utterances emerge from an institution such as the House of Lords, they carry weight and have an impact.

A report on the survey from the IRDC as a House of Lords Committee is also likely to carry much weight and has the potential to be misused.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY OF QUESTIONS IN THE SURVEY

What is your main country of residence?

Mauritius United Kingdom Seychelles Other Prefer not to say

If selected ‘other’: Please specify the country

Were you born on the Chagos islands?

Yes No Prefer not to say

If selected ‘no’ or ‘prefer not to say’: What is your link to the Chagos islands. For example, “Grandparents born on Peros Banhos”.

Have you engaged with the UK Government on the Agreement with Mauritius?

Yes No Prefer not to say

Resettlement and employment opportunities

Under the Agreement, Mauritius can allow Chagossians to live again on the outer islands (but not Diego Garcia). How confident are you that Mauritius will support Chagossians to resettle on the outer islands?

Confident Somewhat confident Not confident

How likely are you to take up this opportunity yourself?

Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely

What would affect your decision?

How important is it that people of Chagossian descent are given greater opportunity to work on the military base on Diego Garcia?

Very important Somewhat important Not important

How likely are you to apply to work on the military base on Diego Garcia if employment was made more accessible for Chagossians?

Very likely Somewhat likely Not likely

You can explain your earlier answers on Resettlement and employment opportunities here if you wish. Leave blank if you do not.

Financial support for Chagossians

The Agreement says that Mauritius will set up a Trust Fund with £40 million from the UK to help Chagossians. How confident are you that Chagossians will benefit from this?

Confident Somewhat confident Not confident

How do you think the money from the trust fund should be used to best support the Chagossian community? For example, what should the priorities be? Leave blank if you are unsure or have no specific views

What oversight mechanisms or management arrangements would give you confidence that the Trust Fund is being properly managed? Leave blank if you are unsure or have no specific views.

In addition to the Trust Fund, the UK will also give Mauritius £45 million every year for 25 years for projects to help all Mauritians. What projects should it prioritise?

You can explain your earlier answers on financial support for Chagossians here if you wish. Leave blank if you do not

Environmental protection and fishing rights

The Agreement says that the UK will assist Mauritius in the establishment and management of a Marine Protected Area (MPA) around the islands. Is the establishment of a new Marine Protected Area important to you?

Yes No Not sure

Who should play a role in managing the Marine Protected Area around the Chagos islands? Select all that apply.

Chagossians Mauritius UK US Other

If you selected ‘Other’, please specify

How can conservation efforts protect nature and still keep Chagossian fishing traditions alive? Leave blank if you are unsure or have no specific views.

You can explain your earlier answers on environmental protections and fishing rights here if you wish. Leave blank if you do not.

Anything else?

Please tell us if there is anything else you would like to raise. Leave blank if not.

20 Nov 2025

Stanford University, California helps support the new Mauritian MPA

Academics at a leading US University, Stanford, are providing support and advice to the Mauritian Government and Chagossian groups involved in the new Chagos Archipelago Marine Protected Area (CAMPA).

Associate Professor of Environmental Social Sciences and of Oceans, Krish Seetah, who had been approached by Mauritius's former Ambassador to the UN told Science X that "as we move forward, we can really use science in an effective way to bring Chagossian knowledge and regional cultural heritage to bear on ocean governance for the marine protected area." He leads a working group of Chagossians, including Olivier Bancoult, scientists, government officials, and legal experts which met earlier this year in March 2025.

Olivier Bancoult told attendees that "We are people who have our tradition, our culture, and we want to preserve it."

3 Nov 2025

Mauritius creates Marine Protected Area in the Chagos

Mauritius has today announced that it is creating a MPA in the Chagos Archipelago to be known as the Chagos Archipelago Marine Protected Area (CAMPA) . Earlier attempts by the UK Government to create a no-take MPA in Chagos met a challenge from the Mauritian Government which resulted in a binding judgment by an Arbitral Tribunal in 2015 that the MPA was unlawful. The Tribunal called upon the UK to negotiate with Mauritius to remedy the issues but for the past 10 years it has failed to do so. In April 2024 the World Database on Protected Areas (WDPA) [1] ceased any reference to any of the UK's MPAs in Chagos [2]. The April 2024 update explained that:

British Overseas Territories: An update has been made to align the WDPA with UN cartography guidance. Data on eight protected areas in the Chagos Archipelago previously submitted by the government of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland have been removed. The area covered by these protected areas was extensive, and there is a resulting decrease in the global figures for coverage of protected areas in the marine realm. Further updates on marine protected areas around the Chagos Archipelago will be provided by the government of Mauritius and the WDPA will be further updated at this time.

The announcement from the Prime Minister's Office of Mauritius declared the new MPA as follows:

CAMPA will comprise the following four zones based on the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) categories for Marine Protected Areas:

(a) Strict Conservation Zone (IUCN Category Ib) This zone, which will cover 23,712 km2 (3.67 per cent of CAMPA), is designated primarily for the conservation of sensitive or special ecosystems, resources or natural features. It is intended to protect the biodiversity of the Great Chagos Bank. The Chagossian community

would be allowed to undertake supervised visits to conserve their traditional, spiritual and cultural values.

(b) Conservation Zone (IUCN Category II) This zone is the largest zone covering 612,611 km2 (94.86 per cent of CAMPA). It is designated for the conservation of the area in general and in particular, seamounts and associated ecosystems located in the deeper areas of the Chagos Archipelago, as well as important

ecosystems such as coral species, foraging grounds and other living resources including the bird population. Environmentally and culturally compatible spiritual, scientific, educational, recreational and visitor activities would be allowed. Fishing would be permitted under an agreed sustainable quota for artisanal, traditional, ceremonial and subsistence purposes.

(c) Habitat Protection Zone (IUCN Category IV) Spanning 2,251 km2 (0.35 per cent of CAMPA), this zone provides for the conservation of bank areas. A low level of artisanal fishing compatible with nature conservation for the sustenance of the local community would be allowed and controlled. Recreation and appropriate small-scale tourism would also be permitted.

(d) Traditional Zone for Resettlement (IUCN Category V) Covering 7,261 km2 (1.12 per cent of CAMPA), this zone would support the sustainable resettlement of members of the Chagossian community whilst enabling the conservation and protection of important landscapes and seascapes, including important marine species. A low level of artisanal fishing compatible with nature conservation for sustenance of the Chagossian community will be allowed.

By categorising CAMPA into zones with varying levels of protection and use, this zoning framework addresses ecological priorities whilst allowing sustainable resettlement in the Chagos Archipelago. No commercial fishing will be allowed in the entire CAMPA.

No definitive map has been published as yet.

[1] https://www.protectedplanet.net/en/thematic-areas/wdpa?tab=WDPA

[2] UNEP-WCMC (2024). Protected areas map of the world, April 2024. Available at: www.protectedplanet.net

18 Jan 2025

Diego Garcia – is the “unsinkable aircraft carrier” sinking beneath the waves?

As Donald Trump is inaugurated as the 47th US President this week, the future of the US Military Base on the island of Diego Garcia has been at the forefront of world news ever since the announcement in October 2024 that the UK would recognise Mauritian sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago and return the islands to its former colony.

The UK/Mauritian treaty, if signed, will grant the UK a renewable 99-year lease over Diego Garcia and secure the long-term future of the US Base, or so it appears.

The announcement generated a deluge of ill-informed outrage, jingoism and opposition from retired Admirals, Right Wing Think Tanks, the Press, and Conservative and Reform politicians. But what has escaped everyone’s attention is that there is an elephant in the room of far greater importance than issues of sovereignty and military control of the Diego Garcia Base – ‘global warming’.

Global sea-level rise since 1993 from satellite alimeter measurements

As the world warms with the release of greenhouse gases from fossil fuel use, so the oceans expand and sea-level rises, and that is very bad for Diego Garcia which is a low-lying coral atoll. The land on which the US base is built is only a few metres above present-day sea level.

Construction of the US base started in 1971 before the world understood the dangers of rising sea levels.

Construction of the airfield on Diego Garcia 1971

Since then, over US $19 billion [1] has been spent on military infrastructure. Coral material that protected the island from wave damage was removed for use in aircraft runway construction. This, together with vegetation clearance and natural processes has already led to erosion of the shoreline [2]. The reaction by the US Navy to this has been to install concrete and rock sea defences which are only a short term panacea.

A new expert study [3] highlights the problems that sea-level rise will cause in the future. It notes that sea level at Diego Garcia is currently rising at a rate of 4 mm a year. Since 1993 it has risen by 12.5 cm. That does not sound much but much worse is to come.

The world is already well on course to exceed a global temperature rise of 1.5oC [4] and greenhouse gas emissions continue to rise [5]. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) has produced a number of scenarios for global CO2 emissions and associated temperature rise. The study focusses on two of these, the ‘middle of the road’ SSP2-4.5, and the ‘dangerous’ SSP3-7.0 as the two most realistic on which to base future projections of sea-level rise. Under SSP2-4.5, emissions stay near current levels before declining mid-century but without reaching net-zero by 2100 and temperature rises by 2.7°C. Under SSP3-7.0, emissions double by 2100 and temperature reaches 3.6oC.

Current governmental policies set the world on a path towards 2.7oC [6]. Whilst the UK and Europe are committed to reducing their use of fossil fuels, the incoming US President has signalled that he will boost fossil fuel production and reverse climate policies and regulations [7] “drill, baby, drill”. Ironically by doing so he is likely to hasten the destruction of his strategically vital base on Diego Garcia.

At Diego Garcia sea level is projected to rise by 82 cm over the period 2020 to 2130 under the SSP2-4.5 scenario. For SSP3-7.0 it is 105 cm.

So why is this so?

The study examines the consequences of sea-level rise by 2130 (the approximate end of the 99-year lease) which are projected to occur under the two IPCC scenarios [8]. Flooding of the low-lying areas on the island which currently only occur on the highest tides perhaps a few times a year become a regular feature 31% of the time (2.7oC) and 48% (3.6oC). In the latter case this means that these areas flood every single high tide, twice a day even in the absence of stormy weather.

Although the airfield runways should remain above water, the jetties in the harbour area will be submerged, the main road south to a space tracking station and armament storage areas inundated, and the “Downtown” area of the base where the military is accommodated saturated.

View towards the small boat basin and deep water wharf at Diego Garcia

Saltwater immersion is, and will have a devastating effect on the vegetation and will also cause the underground freshwater lens which supplies the US base to fail. Breaches in the atoll rim which protect the strategic anchorage are likely.

Like King Canute, the US military might not be able to hold back the sea which threatens its existence without a massive, costly and futile investment in landfill and shoreline defences.

Might nature come to the rescue?

As the sea rises so too do global sea temperatures. This is very bad for the coral reefs which surround Diego Garcia which live near their upper temperature limits. Already waves of widespread coral bleaching and mortality have swept through the Chagos. Once the coral dies, the islands lose their protective barrier against storms and the waves, and the sediment supply which is vital for replenishing the island ceases. Not only is the island inundated by rising sea level it is also battered by wind and waves which destroy the coastline.

The future for the US Base on Diego Garcia, once dubbed the “unsinkable aircraft carrier” does not look rosy. It is particularly appropriate that it is not a China threat that the US needs to be concerned about but rather its own policies which will hasten its demise.

[1] 2024 Base Structure Report – Diego Garcia: https://www.basenation.us/bsr.html

[2] Moffat & Nichol 2009 Diego Garcia shoreline erosion emergency response plan. Naval Facilities Engineering Command, Pacific Division.

[3] https://sites.google.com/site/thechagosarchipelago2/chagos-science/sea-level/tides-and-sea-level-2025

[4] Above pre-industrial levels: https://climate.copernicus.eu/2024-track-be-first-year-exceed-15oc-above-pre-industrial-average?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=C3S_Winter_Newsletter_2024

https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/about-us/news-and-media/media-centre/weather-and-climate-news/2024/2025-global-temperature-outlook

[5] https://edgar.jrc.ec.europa.eu/report_2024

[6] https://climateactiontracker.org/publications/the-climate-crisis-worsens-the-warming-outlook-stagnates/

[7] https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/trump-prepares-wide-ranging-energy-plan-boost-gas-exports-oil-drilling-sources-2024-11-25/

[8] https://earth.gov/sealevel/sea-level-explorer/

17 June 2023

Government of Mauritius announces further boat trip to Chagos for assessment mission for resettlement

Government determined to fight for Mauritius’ territorial sovereignty and achieve decolonisation, states Prime Minister.

Mauritian Government Information Service – 17 June 2023: The Prime Minister, Minister of Defence, Home Affairs and External Communications, Minister for Rodrigues, Outer Islands and Territorial Integrity, Mr Pravind Kumar Jugnauth, reiterated Government’s firm will and determination to continue its efforts to fight for Mauritius to exercise its sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago and thus complete decolonisation.

The Head of Government was speaking, this afternoon, at the Commemoration Ceremony, organised by the Chagossian Welfare Fund, at Marie Charlesia Alexis Chagossian Community Centre, in Baie du Tombeau, to mark the 50th Anniversary of the Deportation of the Chagossian Community.

The Vice-President of the Republic of Mauritius, Mr Eddy Boissézon; the Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Housing and Land Use Planning, and Minister of Tourism, Mr Steven Obeegadoo; the Vice-Prime Minister, Minister of Education, Tertiary Education, Science and Technology, Mrs Leela Devi Dookun-Luchoomun; Ministers; Members of Parliament; and other eminent personalities were also present at the event.

The Commemoration Ceremony featured testimonies by two natives of the Chagossian Community, namely Mr Haris Elysé and Mrs Maudea Saminaden, as well as the video testimony of the Captain of the Nordvaer Ship, Mr Rowly Saminaden; the unveiling of a mural painting of the Nordvaer ship; the launching of a photo exhibition; and the unveiling of a commemorative monument in the yard of the Marie Charlesia Alexis Chagossian Community Centre.

“The deportation of the Chagossian Community is one of the saddest episodes of world history and it is essential that the uprooting and consequent suffering of the Chagossians be remembered,” underpinned the Prime Minister. He seized the opportunity to pay homage to all those deportees and their families, as well as to salute those who stood up against this injustice and fight for the United Kingdom to return the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius. He cited late Sir Anerood Jugnauth, late Rita Bancoult, late Charlesia Alexis, late Ferdinand Mandarin and Mr. Olivier Bancoult, among others.

In his address, the Prime Minister also underscored that the right for the Chagossian Community to settle on the Archipelago was an integral part of the Government’s fight to achieve decolonisation. For Mr Jugnauth, there would be no compromises, during negotiations with the United Kingdom on the exercise of sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago, over the resettlement of the former inhabitants of the Archipelago.

The Judgment of the Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea last April 2023 was also commented upon by Prime Minister Jugnauth. He underlined the great significance of the Judgment which, he said, constitutes a further recognition of Mauritius as the only State which has sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago.

The Prime Minister recalled that the Budget 2023-2024 provides for Government to work towards the implementation of the resettlement programme in the Chagos Archipelago. To this end, Mr Jugnauth stated that another trip to the Chagos Archipelago would be undertaken to carry out an assessment mission on the requirements for a proper resettlement, following the visit undertaken by a Mauritius delegation to the Chagos Archipelago in February 2022 with the presence of representatives of the Chagossian community.

It is recalled that between 1967 and 1973, some 2,000 Chagossians were forcibly deported from the Chagos Archipelago. The last group of Chagossian deportees reached Mauritius on 13 June 1973 on board the Nordvaer Ship.

5 May 2023

BIOT Supreme Court Rues that the BIOT Commissioner must consider granting Legal Aid to stranded refugees

On 5 May 2023 the Chief Justice, the Honourable James Lewis KC, handed down his judgment in an application on behalf of Sri Lankan refugees marooned on Diego Garcia.

The Claimants are among a group of 89 Sri Lankan asylum seekers, including children, who fled India by boat in September 2021. In October 2021, they were rescued by two British Royal Navy vessels when their boat fell into distress in the Indian Ocean. The Navy took them to a secure compound in Diego Garcia, where they have remained ever since. They claimed asylum and, following a delay of over a year, and a period on hunger strike, the BIOT Commissioner eventually issued decisions that removing the Claimants back to Sri Lanka would not breach the principle of non-refoulement under international law.

The Claimants are impecunious, have no resources and do not speak English. When eventually granted access to mobile phones, their relatives made contact with solicitors in England, Duncan Lewis and Leigh Day, whom they instructed to challenge the non-refoulement decisions by way of judicial review. In order to do so, their lawyers made applications for legal aid on their behalf – but the BIOT Commissioner refused to determine them, contending that there was no right to legal aid in BIOT. The Supreme Court of the BIOT held that there is a right to legal aid in BIOT on the basis that both (a) Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (in force in England) applies by virtue of a BIOT Ordinance (Courts Ordinance 1983) applying “applicable and suitable” English law to the territories, and (b) as a matter of common law.

The Supreme Court emphasised that “there cannot be any concept of “lesser justice” in BIOT”; that “the need for a system of legal aid for those who would otherwise be unable to access justice is the same [as in England]" that “it must not be forgotten in this case that state may seek to use coercive power against individuals in returning them forcibly” and “the rule of law cannot be set aside because of administrative difficulties or inconvenience”.

The Commissioner's decision on the grant of legal aid is now awaited. It seems inconceivable in the light of the Chief Justice's comments that it can be refused in this case.

The full judgment is available below:

THE KING (on the application of (1) VT, (2) CT, (3) AAA, (4) ZZZ, (5) AAB, (6) AAC, (7) AAD, (8) AAE, (9) AAF, (10) AAG) -and- THE COMMISSIONER FOR THE BRITISH INDIAN OCEAN TERRITORY [BIOT SC/no3/2023 & BIOT SC/No4/2023]

BIOT Supreme Court 5 May 2023.pdf

Revised Laws of the British Indian Ocean Territory

The series of "Revised Ordinances and Regulations" that were issued by the BIOT Administration (BIOTA) in 2020 are now available from this website - see BIOT Laws . Regrettably BIOTA has not seen fit to publicise these nor to publish them in the BIOT Gazette, nor to make them available from the still lamentably awful and uniformative BIOT website BIOT Administration Web Site .

The BIOT Ship the Nordvaer used to deport Chagossians

15 February 2023

Human Rights Watch publish their Report on the Chagos

Human Rights Watch (HRW) have published a comprehensive report titled “That’s When the Nightmare Started”: UK and US Forced Displacement of the Chagossians and Ongoing Colonial Crimes - HRW Chagos Report .

In the Report they claim that:

"Three apparent crimes against humanity have been committed against the Chagossians by UK authorities: “deportation or forcible transfer of population” as a continuing crime; “other inhumane acts,” which can include prevention of the return of a population to its home, as with the Rohingya in Myanmar; and persecution on the grounds of racial, ethnic, or other grounds. The first crime, at least, was jointly committed by UK and US authorities".

They then call upon the UK and US Governments to provide reparations in 3 key areas:

"First, the UK should provide restitution by immediately lifting the ban on Chagossians permanently returning to the Chagos islands. The UK and the US should also ensure financial and other support and cooperation to restore the islands and enable the Chagossians to return and live and work in dignity across the Archipelago, as they would have done if the UK and US had not forced them to leave.

Second, the UK and US should provide financial compensation to all Chagossians, regardless of whether they wish to or can return, for the harm suffered from the crimes committed against them. This would include the physical, psychological, and economic harms they suffered both during the forced displacement and ever since.

Third, the UK and US should provide satisfaction and a guarantee that similar crimes will not happen again. After consultations with the Chagossians, this could entail full apologies from the UK and US and their heads of state, including the British monarch, acknowledging the extent and nature of the crimes. The UK and US should publish all material concerning the treatment of the Chagossians. They should ensure investigations into these crimes and accountability for the individuals and state institutions most responsible".

26 October 2022

Maldives Changes its position on 2019 UN Resolution and ICJ Advisory Opinion - calling for the UK to end its unlawful control of the Chagos

On 22 May 2019 the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted Resolution 73/295 which welcomed the International Court of Justice Advisory Opinion of 25 February 2019 and concluded that the process of the decolonisation of the Chagos had not been lawfully completed, Chagos was an integral part of the territory of Mauritius, and that the UK was under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos. At the time the United Kingdom was only supported in its opposition to the Resolution by 5 other States (Australia, Hungary, Israel, Maldives, and the United States) with 116 States voting for the Resolution and 56 abstaining. That support is now starting to ebb away.

At a Tribunal for the Law of the Sea in Hamburg, Germany on 26 October 2022 the Maldives announced that its position had changed and that it no longer opposed the Resolution and that it now supports Mauritius in calling for the UK to end its control over the islands . The Maldives Attorney General Mr Ibrahim Riffath confirmed the Maldives President had sent a letter to the Mauritian Prime Minister confirming the island nation's decision to support its neighbour regarding the Chagos Archipelago issue.

This is a significant step and publicly signals that the only State which shares an international boundary with the Chagos Archipelago (a median line between 200 nautical mile Exclusive Economic Zones) no longer recognises the UK's illegitimate claim to sovereignty. The Maldives has also agreed to allow Mauritius to access its Chagos territory from the Maldivian island of Gan which has an international airport and port. This too is a significant step, particularly for access to the Northern Atolls of the Chagos (Peros Bahnos and Salomon) and for future resettlement of the islands which Mauritius has previously announced it would facilitate.

30 August 2022

The Last Colony: A Tale of Exile, Justice and Britain’s Colonial Legacy - By Philippe Sands - Weidenfeld & Nicolson 206pp

A New Hope

James Gow's title (Empire Strikes Back’ in the London Literary Review – August 2022) of his recent review of Philippe Sands' book is ill-judged. More accurate would be the title of the prequel to that Star Wars episode (A New Hope) for that is what now lies ahead for the rule of law and the plight of the Chagossians.

As a former Royal Naval officer, lawyer, and coral reef scientist who has visited Chagos, worked on coral reefs in the Indian Ocean, authored academic papers on the Chagos, and been closely involved in Chagos litigation in the English courts for the last 10 years I found Sands' book a skilful narrative, weaving facts, international law, history, and personal accounts into a very readable and informative book. It is not a legal text and clearly was not so designed. Nonetheless it is accurate and informed and will enlighten those who are interested in the story of the Chagos and their previous inhabitants. It gives an invaluable personal insight into the history and background leading up to the Advisory Opinion by the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in 2019 (ICJ Website).

It appears however that Sands’ writing offends James Gow, who sees it as “part of the campaign to shift the British position through political pressure” and accuses Sands' writing as “propaganda … “based on truth, if not the whole of it”, “an intent to manipulate”. These are baseless accusations for which he provides no further explanation.

Gow cautions the reader that the book is “aimed at creating pressure for the advisory opinion [of the ICJ] to be given practical effect”, adding that it contains a “number of errors and misstatements”, castigating Sands’ error in attributing the UN Security Council with 15 members from its outset. The only other example he provides of a supposed error is his defence of the UK Ambassador to the UN, Karen Pierce, from Sands’ criticism that she “dissembled” when setting out the British position at the UN, but he does not explain this further. In her speech Pierce had stated that a 1965 agreement (the Lancaster House Agreement) with the Mauritian Council of Ministers “included a commitment by the United Kingdom to cede the Territory – I use the word “cede” here deliberately, not “give back” – to cede the territory when it is no longer needed for defence purposes”. At a subsequent press conference (UN media) she again reminded attendees of this and emphasised that “the word cede is important”. Indeed it is, for as Gow would learn from a study of the Agreement the word was never used. The undertaking was to return the islands to Mauritius [Footnote 1]. Since 1982 however the Foreign Office and the British Government has indeed been dissembling that the undertaking was to cede (Legal Status of the Lancaster House Agreement 1965) and so Ms Pierce continues to mislead and misrepresent, whether intentionally or in ignorance. Sands’ criticism is entirely justified.

Gow describes the 2022 visit by the Mauritian chartered motor yacht to the Chagos “a scientific survey vessel on a dubious pretext” thereby illustrating his ignorance of the Law of the Sea and the recent ITLOS case between Mauritius and Maldives. Sands adequately explains the context and purpose, which anyone versed in such matters will understand is not merely plausible but was necessary (Blenheim Reef). Had it not been then I have no doubt that the Foreign Office would not have shown such acquiescence in not formally objecting to the visit.

Finally, Gow accuses Sands’ text of failing to balance self-determination and decolonisation “with a proper discussion of sovereignty”. But Gow fails to mention that the ICJ found that the Chagos had been unlawfully detached from Mauritius in 1965 so any continuing British claim to sovereignty ceases to be relevant. Readers interested in the arguments on this topic can of course access the full records of the case at the ICJ (see link above).

Gow’s charge of errors against Sands is also undermined by a multiplicity of his own: no Chagossians were removed to the UK; the Maldives was a protectorate not a colony; there was no agreement between the new Mauritian government in 1968 but rather one in 1965 between Mauritius’ colonial masters (the UK) and the pre-independence Mauritian Council of Ministers; there is no ‘lease’ for the US Base on Diego Garcia and the Exchange of Notes governing its use was rolled over in 2016 not extended; the ICJ did not “suggest that the UK should transfer sovereignty over the islands to Mauritius as soon as possible” rather that it should “bring an end to its [unlawful] administration of the Chagos Archipelago” [Footnote 2]. Semantics in some instances perhaps, but an example of when those in academic glasshouses should not throw stones.

The Chagossian tragedy is an important element of what happened in the Chagos Islands during my lifetime, and Sands’ references to Madame Liseby Elysé, a 20 year old Chagossian who was deported to Mauritius in 1973, is entirely apposite. The fact that the ICJ permitted her testimony is further evidence of the importance of the human element.

A detailed study of government papers demonstrates that the Foreign Office has expended much energy in either supressing or misrepresenting the facts for over 50 years and has still not learnt that honesty is needed. We need more committed lawyers like Philippe Sands QC and books such as The Last Colony, and perhaps less unsubstantiated and erroneous opinions such as Gow’s.

[1] Lancaster House Agreement 1965: (vii) If the need for the facilities on the islands disappeared the islands should be returned to Mauritius

[2] Para 178 of the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion

24 July 2022

UK no longer a 'coastal state' member of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission

Legal Counsel for the Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) of the UN has formally set out that the United Kingdom's claim to membership of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission (IOTC) as the coastal state in the Chagos Archipelago is no longer valid.

In advice provided for the IOTC 26th Session in May 2022, the Legal Counsel make it clear that:

the FAO and the Depositary recognize that “the Chagos Archipelago forms an integral part of the territory of Mauritius”.
the membership instrument deposited by the UK in 1995 (as the coastal state in the Chagos) is inconsistent with this recognition of Mauritius' sovereignty and is no longer valid.

The UK continues to hold IOTC membership but solely as a State whose vessels fish in the area.

14 April 2022

CHAGOSSIANS WILL BE ALLOWED TO REGISTER AS BRITISH OVERSEAS TERRITORIES CITIZENS

After a long struggle since they first raised this issue in 2018 the UK Government has finally acknowledged that British Nationality law has unfairly prevented descendants of those exiled from the Chagos Islands in the 1960s and 1970s from acquiring British citizenship.

In the forthcoming Nationality and Borders Act which has been debated in both Houses of Parliament over the last year, the Home Office has conceded that descendants ought to have access to the British nationality status they would have acquired automatically by birth on the islands had the exile not occurred. The new law will give Chagossian descendants a period of 5 years to register as British overseas territories citizens, free of charge. They may also then register as British citizens.

Credit is due to Alexander Finch of the legal firm Fragomen for his pro bono advice. Baroness Lister, Baroness Whitaker, and Henry Smith MP (all members of the Chagos Islands (BIOT) All Party Parliamentary Group ) championed the Chagossian cause in the Lords and Commons and worked hard to persuade the Government to accept an amendment to the bill.

For further information see: Fragomen website

26 August 2021

UNIVERSAL POSTAL UNION VOTES TO BAN BIOT POSTAGE STAMPS

At its 27th Congress held in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire, the UPU voted to ban the use of postage stamps issued by the British Indian Ocean Territory Administration. To be valid all post from the Chagos Islands must now bear stamps issued by Mauritius.

Resolution (C15)

117 members of the UPU voted in favour of the Resolution, with 6 against (UK, BIOT, US, Israel, Hungary, Australia). Maldives did not vote.

The Resolution implements the UN General Assembly resolution 73/295 on the advisory opinion of the International Court of Justice on the legal consequences of the separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965, and formally acknowledges that the Chagos Archipelago forms an integral part of the territory of Mauritius, and instructs the International Bureau:

to request that Mauritius keep the Union, through the International Bureau, regularly informed of any decisions regarding international postal operations on the territory of the Chagos Archipelago (including any authorizations to maintain the operation of international mail processing centres by foreign entities on that territory);
in compliance with article 6 of the Universal Postal Convention, to cease the registration, distribution and forwarding of any and all postage stamps issued by the territory formerly known as the “British Indian Ocean Territory”;
to ensure that the use of any associated terminology in UPU documentation is consistent with the aforementioned decision, including the removal of any references to the “British Indian Ocean Territory”, or to the Chagos Archipelago as part of the member country known as the “Overseas Territories of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland”, and
to take any other measures deemed necessary to ensure due implementation of this Congress resolution.

The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office (FCDO) in London is said to be "disappointed" by the outcome. Mauritius has welcomed the decision.

The latest issue of BIOTA stamps entitled 'Angelfish' was on 8 June 2021. The BIOT Post Office on Diego Garcia is managed by the FCDO and operated by Sure (Diego Garcia) Limited. The Post Office provides outbound postal services. Incoming mail is handled by both the US Postal Service and the British Forces Post Office.

Reporting from the BBC: BBC NEWS

CHAGOS SOCIAL MEDIA DAY - 14 JULY 2021

The Chagos Archipelago - Parliamentary Group Chagos Islands (BIOT) All Party Parliamentary Group Honorary President: The Right Honorable Jeremy Corbyn MP Chairman: Andrew Rosindell MP Co-ordinator: David Snoxell Following the judgment of the House of Lords in 2008 the Chagos Islands (BIOT) All Party Parliamentary Group was formed in the

Members of the Chagos Islands (BIOT) All Party Parliamentary Group (see Chagos APPG ) agreed to provide individual messages for Chagos Social Media Day,14 July organised by the Chagos Refugees Group. Members will continue to advocate the Chagossian cause, including the restoration, after 55 years of exile, of the right of Chagossians to return to their islands and resettle if they so desire, and also the reunification of families. The Group believes that an overall settlement between the UK, US, Mauritius and the Chagossians, which respects international law, is vital.

March 2021

Universal Postal Union - proposal to recognise Chagos as an integral part of Mauritius

On March 23, 2021 the Universal Postal Union (UPU website) Council of Administration decided to submit to the 27th Congress in August 2021 (9-27th) a proposal (see UPU Note) that will recognise Mauritius' sovereignty over the Chagos.

When endorsed this will mean that the International Bureau of the UPU will cease the registration, distribution and forwarding of any and all postage stamps issued by the territory formerly known as the "British Indian Ocean Territory" (BIOT). In otherwords, postage stamps issued by BIOT will cease to be usable. Mauritius will also alone be responsible for authorising the operation of international mail processing centres by foreign entities in the Chagos Archipelago.

UPU Note 23.3.21.pdf

January 2021

Chagos Islands - Law of the Sea – Determination that Mauritius is now the ‘coastal State’

On Jan 28, 2021 the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) published a judgment in a case concerning the maritime boundary between the Maldives and Mauritius (Chagos) [Link to Judgment] .

The judgment took account of an earlier decision in 2015 by an Arbitral Tribunal concerning the Chagos Marine Protected Area (MPA), an Advisory Opinion in 2019 of the International Court of Justice (ICJ), and a UN General Assembly Resolution 73/295 of May 22, 2019.

The ITLOS Tribunal held that the ICJ’s Advisory Opinion had been determinative of the question of the sovereignty of the Chagos, and notwithstanding the fact that the UK currently refuses to end its administration, Mauritius is to be regarded as the ‘coastal State’ for the purposes of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

This ruling thus establishes conclusively that under UNCLOS, Mauritius now has sovereignty over the territorial sea of the Chagos (claimed by Mauritius out to 12nm) and rights and jurisdiction over the EEZ (which has also been claimed by Mauritius out to 200nm) and the continental shelf.

The consequences of the ITLOS ruling for the UK’s continued administration of the Chagos are serious. For example, the patrolling and arrest of fishing vessels by the UK anywhere in the Chagos would now be unlawful, and it no longer has the right to grant permissions for scientific research. Its claim to an MPA no longer has legal effect. The UK will undoubtedly lose its membership of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission later this year. Its fisheries management policies for the Chagos are unworkable, with potentially dire consequences for marine conservation in the area.

It is time for the UK to acknowledge that it no longer holds sovereignty over the Chagos and to return the islands to Mauritius. Only by so doing can the islands and their marine natural resources continue to be protected under Mauritian sovereignty and control. The US base on Diego Garcia has nothing to fear concerning its future, Mauritius has consistently said that it may remain. Any attempt by the UK to deny the effect of this judgment and the earlier rulings by the International Court of Justice and the United Nations General Assembly will not only damage the UK's reputation but also represent a failure of its policy of conservation both at home and abroad.

Page last updated: 23 November 2025

Google Sites

Report abuse