Recent News
LATEST NEWS
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.pdfRevised 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
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.pdfJanuary 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.
"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 QC, Mauritius Counsel at the International Court of Justice and ITLOS
Page last updated: 21 June 2023