UN Urges UK to Scrap Chagos Deal and Protect Chagossian Rights

 

A United Nations panel has urged the United Kingdom to scrap its recent agreement with Mauritius regarding the Chagos Islands, calling for a new deal that better protects the rights of the displaced Chagossian people. The panel argued that the existing arrangement “fails to guarantee” key human rights, especially the Chagossians' long-denied right to return to their ancestral homeland.

 

The controversial agreement, signed last month, formalised the return of sovereignty over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. However, it permits the UK to retain operational control of a major military base on Diego Garcia, the largest island in the archipelago. This base is jointly operated with the United States under a long-standing defense arrangement.

 

UN experts expressed concern that the deal continues to prevent Chagossians from returning to Diego Garcia, stating, “the agreement appears to be at variance with the Chagossians’ right to return.” The panel recommended halting the deal and starting new negotiations that more fully account for the Chagossians' rights and historical grievances.

 

A spokesperson from the UK Foreign Office defended the agreement, saying it had “been welcomed by international organisations including the UN secretary general.” However, they acknowledged that the UK's ongoing military presence “hindered” the ability of Chagossians to “exercise their cultural rights in accessing their ancestral lands from which they were expelled.”

 

The financial terms of the agreement allow the UK to pay Mauritius an average of £101 million annually over 99 years in exchange for maintaining the base at Diego Garcia. Yet this financial commitment has not quelled criticism, particularly because it does not appear to address core issues of restitution and return for the Chagossian diaspora.

 

The Chagos Islands lie in the Indian Ocean, around 5,799 miles from the UK and about 1,250 miles northeast of Mauritius. The UK purchased the territory for £3 million in 1968. Mauritius claims it was coerced into relinquishing the islands as a precondition for gaining independence from Britain. Soon after, the UK expelled the Chagossian population to make way for the Diego Garcia military installation. Many were sent to Mauritius and the Seychelles, while others eventually resettled in the UK, especially in Crawley, West Sussex.

 

Since their forced removal, Chagossians have been barred from returning to Diego Garcia. Just before the deal was signed, two Chagossian women born on Diego Garcia and now living in the UK mounted a last-minute legal challenge, arguing that the agreement failed to enshrine their right of return.

 

The deal also includes a £40 million trust fund for Chagossian support, but the UN panel questioned whether this would “comply with the right of the Chagossian people to effective remedy… and prompt reparation.” The experts further noted that the agreement “lacks provisions to facilitate the Chagossian people’s access to cultural sites on Diego Garcia and protect and conserve their unique cultural heritage.”

 

“We recognise the importance of the islands to Chagossians and have worked to ensure the agreement reflects this,” the Foreign Office spokesperson stated in response to the criticisms.

 

Shadow Foreign Secretary Dame Priti Patel also condemned the deal, stating, “The Conservatives have been warning from the start that this deal is bad for British taxpayers and bad for the Chagossian people.” She added, “It is why I have introduced a bill in Parliament that would block the [agreement] and force the government to speak to the people at the heart of their surrender plans.”

 

The UK Parliament has until July 3rd to pass a resolution opposing ratification of the deal.

 

Related Topics:

Chagossians Appeal to UN Over Starmer’s Controversial Island Deal

 

  Adapted by ASEAN Now from BBC  2025-06-12

 

 

Long live the Brit Club. If you know, you know.

I'm considering lodging historical reparation claims against the Celts, Jutes, Angles, Saxons, Romans, Danes (and Scandies in General), France and Germany. 

 

I suspect the melanin content of both the protagonist and antagonists in this fantasy might be an issue. 

It's mind blowing to think that the UK would be so stupid as to give away territory, then lease it back at huge expense causing huge diplomatic issues with disparate groups for various different reasons.

 

Until you realize who is behind it, that is. David "Mastermind" Lammy.

 

4 hours ago, Social Media said:

Many were sent to Mauritius and the Seychelles,

Could be a lot worse !

Why give land to a foreign country yet ban the original inhabitants from having a say? It would be like giving Britain to the French without the British having any say.

43 minutes ago, Purdey said:

Why give land to a foreign country yet ban the original inhabitants from having a say? It would be like giving Britain to the French without the British having any say.

Seems to me that they are gifting the UK to illegal immigrants without the British having a say!