Diego Garcia decision

Robert

Active Member
Moderator
Joined
Apr 1, 2005
Messages
10,799
Reaction score
6,524
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008 ... nders-lose

Britain took the Chagos islands from France in the Napoleonic wars. In 1971 the British government used an immigration ordinance to remove the inhabitants compulsorily so Diego Garcia could be used as a US base.

Both the divisional court and the court of appeal had previously ruled that the Chagossians could return to the outer islands. The Foreign Office appealed against those judgments to the law lords.

The foreign secretary, David Miliband, welcomed today's judgment as a vindication of the government's decision to appeal.

"We do not seek to excuse the conduct of an earlier generation. Our appeal to the House of Lords was not about what happened in the 1960s and 1970s. It was about decisions taken in the international context of 2004.

"This required us to take into account issues of defence [and] security of the archipelago and the fact that an independent study had come down heavily against the feasibility of lasting resettlement of the outer islands of BIOT."

In his dissenting judgment, Lord Bingham declared as void and unlawful a 2004 order to declare, without the authority of parliament, that no person had the right of abode in the Chagos islands.

The power to legislate without going to parliament was "an anachronistic survival", he said. "The duty of protection cannot ordinarily be discharged by removing and excluding the citizen from his homeland."

--

The law lords were told during the hearing in July that Diego Garcia was regarded by the US since the 9/11 terrorist attacks as a "defence facility of the highest importance ... a linchpin for the UK's allies".

The Foreign Office argued that allowing the Chagossians to return would be a "precarious and costly" operation, and the United States had said that it would also present an unacceptable risk to its base.

While there were "undeniably unattractive aspects" to what had happened to the islanders in the 1970s, that was no longer what the case was about, Jonathan Crow QC, for the foreign secretary, told the lords. "The Chagossians do not own any territory," Crow said. "They have no property rights on the islands at all. What is being asserted is a right of mass trespass."

Ten years ago the Chagossians began legal action for the right to return, and in 2000 the divisional court ruled their eviction illegal . The foreign secretary at the time, Robin Cook, agreed they should be allowed to return to all the islands except Diego Garcia. But after the September 11 attacks in 2001, the US said Diego Garcia had become an important base for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In 2004, the UK government issued orders in council that negated the court's ruling, but two years later the high court ruled in favour of the Chagossians. In May last year the government lost again at appeal. In November the lords granted the government leave to appeal but ordered it to pay all legal costs, regardless of the decision.

A recent study found the small number of islanders likely to want to return to the archipelago permanently would be able to make a sustainable living.

The study, backed by the Let Them Return campaign and written by John Howell, a former director of the Overseas Development Institute, suggested there were "no physical, economic or environmental reasons" to prevent resettlement on the islands of Peros Banhos and Salomon.

Howell suggested about 150 families - fewer than 1,000 people and about a quarter of those entitled to go back - would want to return. Eco-tourism and fish exports could provide jobs and income. The total cost to the UK of resettlement would be about £25m, the report said.
How predictable.

"The US state department had argued that the islands might be useful to terrorists," Sounds like it came straight from the Onion.

What an utter disgrace.
 
Perhaps the final nail in the coffin for the islanders chances:
Thousands of Chagos islanders, deported from their homeland in the Indian Ocean by the UK government to make way for a US military base in 1971, will not be given the right of return to resettle, the Foreign Office will announce on Wednesday.

The long-awaited decision – expected to cause enormous disappointment – follows more than 40 years of campaigning, court cases and calls for the UK to right a wrong committed by Harold Wilson’s Labour government.

Hundreds of Chagos islanders living in the UK and Mauritius have been waiting for an announcement for more than two years. But cost, economic viability and objections from the US military have been significant obstacles.

It is expected that the British government will provide a further package of compensation to the islanders and that the announcement will be accompanied by an official apology for the forced movement of 1,500 people. Half of the exiles have since died.
 
Still not giving up, poor bastards:
Mauritius takes UK to court over Chagos Islands sovereignty
International court to hear testimony from 22 countries over Indian Ocean archipelago
2774.jpg

Protesters hold placards outside the international court of justice in The Hague, where the hearing opens on Monday.

The UK’s possession of a remote archipelago in the Indian Ocean that includes the strategic US airbase of Diego Garcia is being challenged at the international court of justice.

Despite British attempts at the United Nations to prevent Mauritius’s claim to the Chagos Islands reaching The Hague, judges will spend four days from Monday hearing representatives from 22 countries arguing over colonial history and the rights of exiled islanders to return.

The overwhelming majority of states intervening in the dispute oppose Britain’s assertion that it has sovereignty over what it calls British Indian Ocean Territory, or BIOT. Only the US, Australia and Israel are expected to support the UK.
 
Chagos Islanders remind us that Britain is a shameful coloniser, not a colony
1838.jpg

‘Wrongs stretching back centuries.’ Chagos islanders protest outside the British high court in 2007.

At a time when Britain needs goodwill and great branding, the world was reminded this week of our nation’s shame, courtesy of the families of 2,000 people dispossessed from their Indian Ocean home in the 1960s and 70s. It’s a shame that looms large in the history of the Chagos Islands, an archipelago whose tiny size is in perfect contrast to the scale of the wrongs its people have witnessed. They are wrongs stretching back centuries, since the British formally acquired the islands from France – as part of the bigger colony of Mauritius – and forced slaves from Mozambique and Madagascar to work on British-owned coconut plantations.

Man Fridays” – leaving the territory available for cold war-era US defence facilities. The papers documenting this sorry process were – along with those that report other state-sanctioned colonial crimes such as the murder and torture of Mau Mau insurgents in Kenya – sent to Britain and “disappeared” by the Foreign Office, to avoid scrutiny or accountability.
 
Poor bastards have no chance:
‘I want to die on my native soil’: exiled Chagos Islanders dream of return
People evicted from former British colony hope new documentary Another Paradise will reinforce UN calls for withdrawal

The Chagos Islanders have had few victories in their long battle to return from British-enforced exile to their archipelago homeland in the Indian Ocean.

But small steps keep their campaign alive and it is hoped a documentary that will premiere on Saturday will exert pressure on the UK government to change its stance.

Britain’s ongoing occupation of the islands was declared illegal in February in an “advisory opinion” by the international court of justice at The Hague. Last month, the UN general assembly showed overwhelming support for a motion setting a six-month deadline for a withdrawal from the Chagos Islands so the archipelago could be reunified with Mauritius.

Another Paradise, by Belgian director Olivier Magis, documents a community in Crawley, West Sussex, home to Britain’s largest Chagossian population.
 
Back
Top