Philippe Sands: “The UK government agreed it – now the deal must let the Chagossians return”

It is time to right the wrongs of the past and allow the resettlement of the island‘s displaced residents

On 22 May, Mauritius and Britain announced an agreement recognising that the Indian Ocean country “is sovereign over the Chagos Archipelago in its entirety”.

The treaty gives effect to a 2019 opinion of the international court of justice (ICJ) and could in time be seen as a landmark. Recognising “the wrongs of the past”, it aims to complete the decolonisation of Mauritius. Mauritius can implement a programme of Chagossian resettlement to most of the Chagos islands, from which they were forcibly removed by Britain between 1967 and 1973. It allows for the conservation of a remarkable and pristine maritime space, and it secures the long-term and effective operation of the military base at Diego Garcia. At a time of significant challenge to a rules-based order, it commits both parties, in its implementation, to “compliance with international law”.

Sixty years have passed since Harold Wilson’s government dismembered the colony of Mauritius. “Frighten him with hope,” Wilson was advised before meeting with the premier of Mauritius, Sir Seewoosagur, in September 1965. Wilson did. He dangled the carrot of independence to procure “consent” to Chagos being detached from Mauritius and remaining under British rule as a new colony, known as the British Indian Ocean Territory.

Between 2015 and 2021, 28 judges at three international courts and tribunals expressed views on the legality of Britain’s occupation of Chagos: not one expressed support for its assertion of sovereignty. The detachment of Chagos “was not based on the free and genuine expression of the will” of the people of Mauritius, the ICJ concluded. Britain’s legal claim was hopeless, and it undermined efforts to garner international support in other matters, such as Russia’s illegal occupation of Ukraine.

That was why Liz Truss’s government started negotiations with Mauritius, leading to the agreement, which were continued by Rishi Sunak’s government and concluded by Labour. Agreement was reached on 3 October 2024, then revised following a political change in Mauritius. The agreement has the support of the African Union, the US and India, a striking combination.

On the Mauritian side, there has been admirable work by the civil servants, lawyers and ambassadors I had the privilege of working with as counsel for Mauritius. Successive Mauritian prime ministers – Navin Ramgoolam, Sir Anerood Jugnauth and Pravind Jugnauth – took courageous decisions; a small African country taking on two permanent members of the security council – the US staunchly supporting the UK – and prevailing. It is, by any standard, a remarkable tale.

Yet the beating heart of the Chagos story is surely the extraordinary Chagossian community, dispersed to Mauritius, the Seychelles and the UK, and holding disparate views about their future. The conclusions of the ICJ were supported by devastating British government documents from the time of the dismemberment, obtained by Olivier Bancoult, a Chagossian electrician, during the course of litigation before the English courts.

At the ICJ hearings in The Hague, it was the searing testimony of Liseby Elysé, ejected from the archipelago as a 20-year-old, newly married and pregnant woman, that turned hearts and minds. The hope must now be that work will start without delay on the rehabilitation of Peros Banhos, to allow Bancoult, Elysé and others to return, coupled with proper funding and a decent degree of autonomy in the stewardship of their lands and its environment.

Yet dangers lie ahead, as Jugnauth made clear last week. He shared extracts of the October 2024 agreement that describe how Mauritius could develop islands other than Diego Garcia, with its military base, without the need for British sign-off. By contrast, with the revised agreement, signed a few days ago, “any proposal for development in the land territory” of Chagos must be submitted to a security review involving the UK, which can block the proposal. This potential right of veto of infrastructure and other land developments to facilitate Chagossian resettlement is, to say the least, alarming.

In the face of so significant a revision, Mauritius must have an enforceable confirmation from London that it will not block developments necessary to allow Chagossians to return, such as housing, transport and infirmaries. Without such confirmation, there is a risk of sovereignty in name alone, of undermining the right of self-determination under international law, and the successive rulings of 28 international judges and arbitrators.

Let’s be clear: against the background of the memories of 1965, this agreement is of potentially historic significance, a powerful riposte to those who attack international rules and courts. Its fair implementation is crucial for both countries but especially Britain, as it seeks to enhance its global role and reputation, bringing down the flag on its last colony in Africa.

Doing the right thing, for the Chagossians, the environment, national security and the rule of law, can truly be something to be proud of, not to belittle or attack.

Philippe Sands KC acted as counsel for Mauritius from 2010 to 2024. He is author of The Last Colony: A Tale of Exile, Justice and Britain’s Colonial Legacy and 38 Londres Street

Posted by Minority Voice on Jun 2 2025. Filed under Actualités, Economie, En Direct, Featured, Politique. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response or trackback to this entry