Log in

Relevant bibliographies by topics / Chagossian / Journal articles

Journal articles on the topic 'Chagossian'

To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Chagossian.

Author: Grafiati

Published: 10 December 2022

Last updated: 28 January 2023

Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles

Select a source type:

Consult the top 34 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Chagossian.'

Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.

You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.

Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.

1

Rambaree, Komalsingh. "Environmental Justice in the Case of the Chagos Marine Protected Area: Implications for International Social Work." Sustainability 12, no. 20 (October 11, 2020): 8349. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/su12208349.

Full text

Abstract:

Between the late 1960s and the early 1970s, the British government forcibly removed about 15,000 Chagossians from the Chagos Archipelago. Current legislation based on the declaration of the Chagos-Marine Protected Area (MPA) plays a crucial role in preventing the Chagossians from returning to their homeland. In this particular case study, the article aims to analyze discourses related to the establishment of the Chagos-MPA using an environmental justice framework, to consider the implications for international social work practice. Materials from court rulings, official government reports, and academic/journalist publications on the MPA, as well as from seven semi-structured interviews with key informants from three Chagossian communities based in Mauritius, Seychelles, and the United Kingdom were analyzed using ATLAS-ti 8.4 software. The main findings of the deductive critical discourse analysis are discussed concerning substantive, distributive, and procedural environmental justice for the Chagossian community (This term is used for referring different Chagossian communities from Mauritius, Seychelles, and the United Kingdom as a single homogenous group). This article calls for international social work interventions through transnational alliances between international organizations in challenging the socio-political forces that are having deleterious impacts upon the marginalized and disenfranchised populations and their biophysical environment.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

2

Pujolràs-Noguer, Esther, and Felicity Hand. "The Myth of the Empty Territory: The Tragedy of the Chagos Islanders." Revista Canaria de Estudios Ingleses, no. 82 (2021): 155–72. http://dx.doi.org/10.25145/j.recaesin.2021.82.11.

Full text

Abstract:

In this article we outline the tragedy of the Chagos Islanders forcibly evicted from their homeland to make way for an American military base. A new colony was invented, the British Indian Ocean Territory, which would be declared a marine reserve in 2010. The British have refused to allow the Chagossians the right to return to their homelands not to protect the environment, but rather to safeguard the political agreement based on economic and military imperialism. Therefore this community has been condemned to historical erasure as their stories are imbricated in the official narration of an empty territory. To prevent the plight of the Chagossians from falling into oblivion, we organized a creative writing workshop with members of the community in order to grant visibility to the Chagossian fight for identity and recognition.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

3

Alexandre, Caecilia, and Konstantia Koutouki. "No Way Home for the Chagossians: Law and Power Politics." International Journal on Minority and Group Rights 25, no. 3 (August 3, 2018): 369–400. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718115-02503003.

Full text

Abstract:

If home is where the heart is, then home for the Chagossian people is the Chagos archipelago. The story of the Chagos people is not very well known, but it is a story of injustice and of a legal and political battle to bring an end to this injustice. Evicted from their homes following a decision by the British and American Governments to construct an Anglo-American military base on one of the archipelago’s islands, Diego Garcia, the Chagossians have fought in political and legal arenas for the right to return home for nearly 50 years. The basis for their demand to return home is well-founded under national and international legal principles. However, despite political and legal gains made throughout the years, the right to return home, remains elusive.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

4

Jeffery, Laura, and Rebecca Rotter. "Safeguarding sega: transmission, inscription, and appropriation of Chagossian intangible cultural heritage." International Journal of Heritage Studies 25, no. 10 (December 16, 2018): 1020–33. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13527258.2018.1555671.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

5

Jeffery, Laura, and Steffen Johannessen. "Reflections on the Life and Art of the Chagossian Painter Clément Siatous." Wasafiri 26, no. 2 (June 2011): 72–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02690055.2011.557553.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

6

Vine, David. "What If You Can’t Protest the Base? The Chagossian Exile, the Struggle for Democracy, and the Military Base on Diego Garcia." South Atlantic Quarterly 111, no. 4 (October 1, 2012): 847–56. http://dx.doi.org/10.1215/00382876-1724228.

Full text

Abstract:

The people of the Chagos Archipelago were forcibly removed from their homeland in the Indian Ocean’s Chagos Archipelago in the late 1960s and early 1970s when the US and British governments created a military base on the people’s largest island, Diego Garcia. Since their expulsion, the people, known as Chagossians, have struggled to return to their homeland and win proper compensation. Because US and UK law bar most suits challenging military and foreign policy and because the Chagossians are a people of around five thousand taking on two world powers, they have generally avoided protesting the base responsible for their exile. On the one hand, this peculiar situation has constrained the people’s movement by impeding coalition building and causing tensions with some antibase activists. On the other hand, while theirs is explicitly not an antibase struggle, it shares much in common with other antibase struggles in challenging the loss of sovereignty over occupied land, in demanding fundamental democratic rights, and in opposing unchecked government power and the archaic vestiges of colonialism on which all extraterritorial bases rely.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

7

Lythgoe, Gail. "Asymmetrical international law and its role in constituting empires: the ICJ Chagos Advisory Opinion." Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 71, no. 2 (August 14, 2020): 305–15. http://dx.doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v71i2.318.

Full text

Abstract:

The ongoing relationship between the UK and the Chagos Archipelago raises a number of important questions about international law’s relationship with imperialism, more specifically, the ability of the international legal order to influence the fact and the manner of decolonisation. In this contribution, I explore some aspects of this problem. I begin by providing a brief overview of the proceedings of the International Court of Justice, summarising the basic legal consequences of the court’s Advisory Opinion, before discussing its implications from the standpoint of what it reveals about international law’s relationship with the residual British Empire. My argument is that, for all its apparent attempts to promote decolonisation and self-determination, the international legal order has been and continues to remain complicit in the maintenance of exactly the kind of asymmetrical legal relations that constitute empires. Thus, although the Chagos Advisory Opinion may well have long-term significance for the development of the international legal doctrine and the teachings of international law, given the UK’s current position, it will not have any immediate impact on the plight of the Chagossian people.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

8

Jeffery, Laura Rebecca. "Ecological restoration in a cultural landscape: conservationist and Chagossian approaches to controlling the ‘coconut chaos’ on the Chagos Archipelago." Human Ecology 42, no. 6 (August 23, 2014): 999–1006. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10745-014-9696-y.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

9

Jeffery, Laura Rebecca. "Erratum to: Ecological restoration in a cultural landscape: conservationist and Chagossian approaches to controlling the ‘coconut chaos’ on the Chagos Archipelago." Human Ecology 43, no. 1 (February 2015): 185. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10745-014-9716-y.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

10

Frost, Tom, and C. R. G. Murray. "Homeland: Reconceptualising the Chagossians’ Litigation." Oxford Journal of Legal Studies 40, no. 4 (2020): 764–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ojls/gqaa033.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract The British Indian Ocean Territory’s (BIOT) establishment in the 1960s exemplifies the UK’s efforts to maintain global standing through imperial possessions. The colonised people of these islands, the Chagossians, were swiftly expelled, their interests subordinated to those of the imperial whole. This article re-evaluates the Chagossians’ legal resistance to their treatment, drawing upon archival releases which shed light on the earliest stages of their litigation. We contend that private law rights of exclusion have underpinned the UK Government’s approach to the saga, as they have done for colonised peoples in the past, including the Banabans on Ocean Island. These underpinnings have ensured that the UK Courts’ judicial review decisions have not been able to adequately address the Chagossians’ interests, let alone reverse their expulsion. Rigid categorisations of the Chagossians’ relationship to property and territory have further hampered their cause. We nonetheless maintain that the Supreme Court decision of Bancoult (No 2) leaves open the possibility of future legal challenges by the Chagossians against the UK Government’s latest refusal to authorise resettlement of parts of the BIOT. Ongoing litigation, however, requires that the courts accept that the Chagossians’ claims cannot be conceptualised in narrow public law terms, with Commonwealth Aboriginal/Indigenous-title jurisprudence providing one as-yet-unexplored avenue.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

11

Raumnauth, Darsheenee, and Roopanand Mahadew. "Assessing the responsibilities of the United Kingdom and Mauritius towards the Chagossians under international law." Afrika Focus 29, no. 2 (February 26, 2016): 39–57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2031356x-02902004.

Full text

Abstract:

This article reviews the obligations under international law of the United Kingdom and Mauritius towards the Chagossians. With the detachment of Chagos from Mauritius as an essential condition for the independence of Mauritius from the British colonial master, the Chagossians have, over the past four decades, endured enormous human rights violations . This article assesses the responsibility of the two states vis-à-vis the Chagossians. A comprehensive factual account is first presented to clarify understanding of the history of Chagos. The legal framework is then analysed to assess the responsibility of each state, before a number of recommendations are made.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

12

Novita Elpasari, Jerina. "UNILATERAL CLAIM OVER CHAGOS ARCHIPELAGO AS BRITISH INDIAN OCEAN TERRITORY (BIOT) BY UNITED KINGDOM BASED ON INTERNATIONAL LAW." Padjadjaran Journal of International Law 3, no. 1 (January 31, 2019): 49–70. http://dx.doi.org/10.23920/pjil.v3i1.311.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn 1965, United Kingdom (UK) made a unilateral claim over the Chagos Archipelago as British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) based on the BIOT Order of 1965 and Statutory Instrument of 1965 No. 1020. Due to this unilateral act, the Chagos Archipelago no longer parts of Mauritius. Problem arising from Britain's unilateral claim to the territory was further aggravated by the United Kingdom’s act in enforcing population transfer towards all Chagos islanders (Chagossians) out of the territory without adequate compensations and resettlement. This research aims to analyze the legality of unilateral claims over the Chagos archipelago as a BIOT and the enforced transfer of Chagossians from their original residential place by the United Kingdom. It argues that under international law, Chagos Archipelago is recognized as an area that should remain integrated within the territory of Mauritius. It further argues that the UK has violated international law by committing enforced population transfer.Keywords: BIOT, Enforced Population Transfer, Territory, The Chagos Archipelago, Unilateral Act. AbstrakPada tahun 1965, Inggris melakukan klaim sepihak atas wilayah Kepulauan Chagos sebagai British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) berdasarkan British Indian Ocean Territory Order of 1965 dan Statutory Instrument of 1965 No. 1020. Kepulauan Chagos merupakan bagian dari Mauritius pada saat Mauritius berada dibawah penjajahan Inggris. Tindakan yang dilakukan oleh Inggris terhadap wilayah tersebut berdampak pada terpisahnya kepulauan Chagos dari Mauritius. Permasalahan yang timbul dari Klaim sepihak Inggris atas wilayah tersebut kemudian turut diperparah dengan tindakan Inggris yang melakukan pemindahan paksa seluruh penduduk kepulauan Chagos (Chagossians) dari wilayah tersebut tanpa kompensasi dan tempat tinggal pengganti yang layak serta memadai. Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis legalitas klaim sepihak terhadap kepulauan Chagos sebagai BIOT dan pemindahan Chagossians dari tempat tinggal asalnya secara paksa yang dilakukan oleh Inggris sebagai enforced population transfer. Penelitian ini menunjukkan bahwa wilayah kepulauan Chagos diakui sebagai wilayah yang seharusnya tetap terintegrasi dalam wilayah Mauritius dan penetapan wilayah tersebut sebagai BIOT telah bertentangan dengan prinsip dan ketentuan hukum internasional. Kata Kunci: BIOT, Enforced Population Transfer, Kepulauan Chagos, Tindakan Sepihak, Wilayah

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

13

Mahadew, Roopanand, and Arzeena Bhowarkan. "Dissenting Opinions of Judges of the unclos Tribunal in the Chagos Case." Afrika Focus 34, no. 1 (June 9, 2021): 28–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/2031356x-34010004.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Mauritius won its first victory when the “tribunal constituted under Annex vii of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” delivered its award “in the matter of the Chagos Marine Protected Area (mpa) Arbitration, between the Republic of Mauritius and the United Kingdom”. The award declared that the mpa established around Chagos by the United Kingdom was against international law. However, the decision desired by both Mauritius and the Chagossians is found in the dissenting opinion, which is, as a matter of law, non-binding. The dissenting opinion is to the effect that the tribunal had jurisdiction to consider the issue of sovereignty over Chagos and that if such issue was considered, Mauritius had a strong case for winning back sovereignty over Chagos. This article aims to make the dissenting opinions more widely known and reflect on the legal value of such opinions, alongside their high political and moral value and relevance to Mauritius and the Chagossians.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

14

Allen, Stephen. "SELF-DETERMINATION, THE CHAGOS ADVISORY OPINION AND THE CHAGOSSIANS." International and Comparative Law Quarterly 69, no. 1 (December 23, 2019): 203–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0020589319000526.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn its Chagos Advisory Opinion, the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled that the UK's detachment of the Chagos Archipelago from the colony of Mauritius on the eve of independence constituted a violation of customary international law (CIL). This article analyses the Court's approach to establishing the emergence and content of the right to self-determination in this frustrated case of decolonisation. It goes on to examine the argument that self-determination's peremptory character has decisive consequences in this specific context—a contention which found favour with several judges in their Separate Opinions. The article explores the extent to which the claims and counterclaims, made during the advisory proceedings, turned on countervailing readings of not only the key sources of custom but also of the principle of inter-temporal law. The final sections consider the significance of the Chagos Opinion for the Chagossians, both in relation to the Archipelago's resettlement and for their outstanding appeal in the UK courts (where the European Convention on Human Rights performs a pivotal role).

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

15

Jeffery, Laura. "Historical Narrative and Legal Evidence: Judging Chagossians? High Court Testimonies." PoLAR: Political and Legal Anthropology Review 29, no. 2 (November 2006): 228–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.1525/pol.2006.29.2.228.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

16

Biad, Abdelwahab, and Elsa Edynak. "L’arbitrage relatif à l’aire marine protégée des Chagos (Maurice c. Royaume-Uni) du 18 mars 2015 : une décision prudente pour un litige complexe." Revue québécoise de droit international 29, no. 1 (April 30, 2018): 55–83. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1045110ar.

Full text

Abstract:

Alors que la lutte des Chagossiens pour retourner sur leur archipel semblait compromise après l’échec du recours devant la Cour européenne des droits de l’homme (CEDH), un nouveau rebondissement judiciaire entre Maurice et le Royaume-Uni vient raviver les espoirs de ce peuple déplacé. Ce différend est survenu à la suite de la déclaration britannique de 2010 créant une aire marine protégée autour de l’archipel des Chagos, sans concertation avec Maurice. Ce dernier, en contrepartie de son indépendance, avait accepté d’accorder la jouissance partagée et temporaire de l’archipel au Royaume-Uni (qui depuis a mis le territoire à la disposition des États-Unis à des fins de défense). Cette déclaration affecte en profondeur les droits de Maurice (notamment en matière de pêche et d’exploitation des sols et sous-sols marins). Mais en défendant ses intérêts par le biais de la création d’un tribunal arbitral constitué en vertu de l’annexe VII de la Convention des Nations unies sur le droit de la mer, Maurice ouvre une véritable boîte de Pandore. Pour déterminer l’étendue et la nature des droits de Maurice sur l’archipel, le tribunal va devoir se replonger dans le passé colonial britannique houleux de cette région de l’océan Indien, lequel concerne directement les droits des Chagossiens. Lorsque, le 18 mars 2015, le tribunal arbitral rendit sa décision, la reconnaissance des droits souverains de Maurice à défaut de la reconnaissance de son statut d’État souverain sur l’archipel, la déception du requérant fut grande. Cet arbitrage intéresse également les Chagossiens, qui voyaient en la reconnaissance de la souveraineté de Maurice sur les Chagos, un des derniers espoirs de retour sur l’archipel. Cette décision est l’occasion de revenir sur ce conflit, par une analyse juridique portant sur les différents aspects du droit international (droit de la mer, de l’environnement, de la décolonisation), mettant en lumière les nombreux enjeux encore actuels de cette affaire.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

17

HARRIS, PETER. "Decolonising the special relationship: Diego Garcia, the Chagossians, and Anglo-American relations." Review of International Studies 39, no. 3 (December 11, 2012): 707–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0260210512000319.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractIn this article, I challenge the prevailing concept of the UK-US ‘special relationship’ with a view to improving the concept as an analytic tool for researchers. As it stands, the special relationship draws attention to an uncommonly close bond between two state actors in the post-Second World War period, especially in terms of military cooperation. This conception imposes analytic costs – namely, an elision of imperialism as a feature of Anglo-American relations and a concomitant marginalisation of subaltern social actors. In response, I propose a reconception that posits the subaltern – third parties – as integral to the relationship, thus better capturing the empirical reality of Anglo-American relations past and present. Theoretically, I draw upon postcolonial International Relations scholarship and recent theories of friendship in international politics. Empirically, I present a case study of the US military base on Diego Garcia in the Chagos Islands.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

18

Frost, Tom, and C. R. G. Murray. "The Chagos Islands cases: the empire strikes back." Northern Ireland Legal Quarterly 66, no. 3 (August 17, 2018): 263–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.53386/nilq.v66i3.153.

Full text

Abstract:

Good governance requires the accommodation of multiple interests in the cause of decision-making. However, undue regard for particular sectional interests can take its toll upon public faith in government administration. Historically, broad conceptions of the good of the commonwealth were employed to outweigh the interests of groups that resisted colonisation. In the decision-making of the British Empire, the standard approach for justifying the marginalisation of the interests of colonised groups was that they were uncivilised and that particular hardships were the price to be paid for bringing to them the imperial dividend of industrial society. It is widely assumed that with the dismantling of the British Empire, such impulses and their accompanying jurisprudence became a thing of the past. Even as decolonisation proceeded apace after the Second World War, however, the UK maintained control of strategically important islands with a view towards sustaining its global role. In an infamous example from this twilight period of empire, in the 1960s imperial interests were used to justify the expulsion of the Chagos islanders from the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). Into the twenty-first century, this forced elision of the UK’s interests with the imperial ‘common good’ continues to take centre stage in courtroom battles over the islanders’ rights, being cited before domestic and international tribunals in order to maintain the Chagossians’ exclusion from their homeland. This article considers the new jurisprudence of imperialism which has emerged in a string of decisions which have continued to marginalise the Chagossians’ interests.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

19

Jeffery, Laura. "Chagossians refused right to return home: A sequel to Vine (AT 24[4])." Anthropology Today 25, no. 1 (February 2009): 24–26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8322.2009.00644.x.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

20

Jeffery, Laura. "Forced Displacement, Onward Migration and Reformulations of ‘Home’ by Chagossians in Crawley, UK." Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies 36, no. 7 (June 28, 2010): 1099–117. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13691830903517511.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

21

Banna, Mahir Al. "The Chagos Archipelago Case and the Limits of International Law (English) L’Affaire de l’Archipel des Chagos et Les Limites du Droit International." International Journal of Private Law and International Arbitration 1, no. 1 (2022): 08–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.54216/ijplia.010101.

Full text

Abstract:

The legal status of the Chagos archipelago is complex because it is of a hybrid nature: it is under the sovereignty of the United Kingdom which grants rights at sea to Mauritius, and on land to the United States (Diego Garcia). This case is also important because it is not easy to have two divergent preoccupations: the protection of the environment in the face of the rights of Chagossians and environmental sustainability in the face of equity and human rights. This case was first submitted to the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA), before the UN General Assembly had asked the International Court of Justice (ICJ) about the claims that the PCA declared it lacked jurisdiction to answer.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

22

Bhatt, Kinnari. "A post-colonial legal approach to the Chagos case and the (dis)application of land rights norms." International Journal of Law in Context 15, no. 1 (June 8, 2018): 1–19. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s1744552318000095.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractOne way of understanding the exile of the Chagos Islanders and their inability to return to their ancestral land is through a reading of the case from a perspective of post-colonial legal scholarship. Chagossians have strong legal rights to land and remedies of compensation and return through a purposive application of the international legal definition of Indigenous, Magna Carta right to abode and international human rights law that could address their dispossession. Yet, the inability of those rights to be meaningfully applied has been constrained because of the post-colonial way they are legally interpreted, creating a legal vacuum in which basic fairness and substantive equality have been routinely compromised. Drawing attention to the continued legal denial of return in the context of decolonisation, ongoing colonialism and the rule of law makes sense of the legal record and explains the expulsion of the islanders despite the moral merits of return.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

23

KATTAN, Victor. "The Chagos Advisory Opinion and the Law of Self-Determination." Asian Journal of International Law 10, no. 1 (November 4, 2019): 12–22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s2044251319000195.

Full text

Abstract:

AbstractThe Advisory Opinion of the International Court of Justice [ICJ] on the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 has been hailed as a major victory by the government of Mauritius and by representatives of the Chagossians who were forcibly removed from the islands to make way for the establishment of an American military facility on the island of Diego Garcia at the height of the Cold War. The opinion was categorical: the process of decolonization of Mauritius was not lawfully completed when that country acceded to independence in 1968. The UK lost on every single argument it made before the Court and is under an obligation to bring its administration of the Chagos Archipelago to an end “as rapidly as possible”. This comment focuses on what the ICJ said about self-determination, and whether the Advisory Opinion could have consequences for future cases at the Court.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

24

Jeffery, Laura. "Victims and Patrons: Strategic Alliances and the Anti‐Politics of Victimhood among Displaced Chagossians and their Supporters." History and Anthropology 17, no. 4 (December 2006): 297–312. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/02757200600914060.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

25

Jeffery, Laura, and Rebecca Rotter. "Sustenance, nourishment, and cultivation: plants as living cultural heritage for dispersed Chagossians in Mauritius, Seychelles, and the UK." Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 22, no. 2 (March 28, 2016): 296–313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-9655.12402.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

26

Harris, Peter. "Dead end or crossroads? The Chagossians fail in Strasbourg (Respond to this article at http://www.therai.org.uk/at/debate)." Anthropology Today 29, no. 3 (May 30, 2013): 26. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-8322.12033.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

27

Johnstone, Rachael Lorna. "From the Indian Ocean to the Arctic: What the Chagos Archipelago Advisory Opinion Tells Us about Greenland." Yearbook of Polar Law Online 12, no. 1 (December 13, 2021): 308–27. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/22116427_012010019.

Full text

Abstract:

On February 25, 2019, the International Court of Justice issued its advisory opinion on Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965. The judges held by a majority of 13:1 that the process of decolonisation of Mauritius is incomplete, owing to the separation of the Chagos Archipelago shortly before Mauritian independence, that the United Kingdom should end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible, and that all Member States of the United Nations should cooperate to complete the decolonisation of Mauritius. The (partial) decolonisation of Mauritius in 1968 and the treatment of the Chagos islanders (Chagossians) have important parallels with the purported decolonisation of Greenland in 1952–54. In both cases, the consultative body of the colonised people was neither fully independent nor representative of all the people concerned. No real choice was given to either body; rather the colonial power offered only the continuation of the status quo or professed self-determination on terms defined by the colonial power itself. Furthermore, the process of decolonisation was inherently linked to the forcible transfer of people in order to make way for a United States military facility. Nevertheless, there are some relevant differences. First of all, Greenland was purportedly decolonised in 1953, some seven years before the UN General Assembly Declaration on the Granting of Independence to Colonial Countries and Peoples (UNGA Res. 1514(XV) 1960). Second, the UN General Assembly accepted the Danish government’s representations regarding the full decolonisation of Greenland (UNGA Res. 849 (1954), in contrast to their position regarding Mauritius that decolonisation was and remains incomplete, owing to the separation of the Chagos Archipelago (UNGA Res(XX) 1965). Third, though the Chagossians have been recognised as indigenous at the UN, the British government has continually denied this status and (mis)characterises them as a transient people, while Denmark has accepted the status of the Greenlanders as both an indigenous people and a colonial people, entitled to self-determination. This article examines the implications for the judgment for the Greenland case as well as broader questions of self-determination of peoples. It concludes that the colonial boundaries continue to govern in decolonisation cases, with the consequence that the Greenlanders are likely to be held to be a single people; that the erga omnes character of the right to self-determination means that all States must cooperate to facilitate Greenlanders’ choices for their future; and that there remain significant procedural hurdles that prevent colonial and indigenous peoples having their voices heard, even in the matters that concern them most of all.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

28

Twyman-Ghoshal, Anamika. "State Co-offending: The Case of the Recolonization of the Chagos Archipelago and the Forced Eviction of the Chagossians." Critical Criminology 29, no. 2 (May 19, 2021): 311–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10612-021-09570-4.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

29

Hilpold, Peter. "‘Humanizing’ the Law of Self-Determination – the Chagos Island Case." Nordic Journal of International Law 91, no. 2 (May 9, 2022): 189–215. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15718107-91020001.

Full text

Abstract:

Abstract Human rights are perceived more and more as a set of norms of all-encompassing effects determining all international action, in particular also those by the United Nations. The recent icj Opinion in the Chagos case seems to suggest, however, that the field of self-determination is not yet really affected by this development. The icj has dealt with this case in a very traditional manner declaring, as it was foreseeable, that the de-colonisation process of the Chagos Islands has not been lawfully completed. At the same time, the icj widely ignored the direful lot of the Chagossians. This article investigates whether it is still tenable to deal with a decolonisation case exclusively from the perspective of ‘classic colonial self-determination’ while barely considering the lot of the people directly affected by these events. The main proposition of this article is that the process of humanization of international law must not stop short from affecting also the law of self-determination. It is suggested, on the contrary, that in the 21th century the law of self-determination has to set the individuals composing the people in the forefront.

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

30

Trinidad, Jamie, Stephen Allen, and Thomas Burri. "Amicus Curiae Submissions by the Chagossian Committee Seychelles in the Dispute concerning Delimitation of the Maritime Boundary between Mauritius and Maldives." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2022. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4038071.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

31

Raumnauth, Darsheenee, and Roopanand Mahadew. "Assessing the responsibilities of the United Kingdom and Mauritius towards the Chagossians under international law." Afrika Focus 29, no. 2 (August 14, 2016). http://dx.doi.org/10.21825/af.v29i2.4844.

Full text

Abstract:

This article reviews the obligations under international law of the United Kingdom and Mauritius towards the Chagossians. With the detachment of Chagos from Mauritius as an essential condition for the independence of Mauritius from the British colonial master, the Chagossians have, over the past four decades, endured enormous human rights violations. This article assesses the responsibility of the two states vis-à-vis the Chagossians. A comprehensive factual account is rst presented to clarify understanding of the history of Chagos. The legal framework is then analysed to assess the responsibility of each state, before a number of recommendations are made. Key words: Chagos, Mauritius, United Kingdom, British Indian Ocean territories

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

32

Frost, Tom, and C. R. G. Murray. "Homeland: Reconceptualising the Chagossians’ Litigation." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2020. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3641509.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

33

Murray, C. R. G., and Tom Frost. "The Chagossians' Struggle and the Last Bastions of Imperial Constitutionalism." SSRN Electronic Journal, 2018. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3118371.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

34

Giraudeau, Géraldine. "A Slight Revenge and a Growing Hope for Mauritius and the Chagossians: The UNCLOS Arbitral Tribunal’s Award of 18 March 2015 on Chagos Marine Protected Area (Mauritius v. United Kingdom)." Revista de Direito Internacional 12, no. 2 (December 31, 2015). http://dx.doi.org/10.5102/rdi.v12i2.3878.

Full text

APA, Harvard, Vancouver, ISO, and other styles

We offer discounts on all premium plans for authors whose works are included in thematic literature selections. Contact us to get a unique promo code!