British High Court Upholds Government Scheme to Prevent Resettlement of the Chagos Islands

The British High Court of Appeals upheld the creation of a controversial marine park in the Indian Ocean that many believe was designed to protect a U.S. airbase by preventing the resettlement of the native population.

Former residents of the Chagos Islands, who were forced into exile say the designation of the islands as a marine park (which comes with a ban on commercial fishing) was unlawfully aimed at preventing them resettling their former homeland.  But Lord Justice Richards and Justice Mitting ruled that the marine protected area (MPA) was compatible with EU law.

The British expelled the Chagossians between 1965 and 1973 to allow the U.S . to establish an airbase on Diego Garcia island, the largest island in the Chagos archipelago. The expulsion has been described by critics as one of the most shameful episodes in modern British colonial history.  The exiled Chagossians have fought a long series of legal battles for the right of return.  It is also believed that the island was used by the U.S. for several rendition flights during the Iraq war.

Chagossian lawyers said the designation of the marine park came on the heels of British consultations with the U.S ., during which the Americans were assured that the use of their base on Diego Garcia island would not be adversely affected by the MPA. 

Roberts denied under cross-examination at the high court that the marine park was created for the "improper purpose" of keeping the Chagossians out as the US wanted, and said it was for environmental and conservation purposes.

A classified U.S. government cable leaked by WikiLeaks supported their accusations.  In a leaked cable from 2009, British diplomat Colin Roberts told American diplomats the MPA designation would keep the Chagossians from resettling the islands and mean "no human footprints" in the British Indian Ocean territories.  The judges initially allowed the Chagossians' lawyers to question Roberts about the cable-- but later reversed themselves, saying the the cable (and all copies of it held by newspapers) were inadmissable as evidence.

The judges tried to explain their decision, saying there was now "a settled principle of public international and municipal law that the inviolability of diplomatic communications requires that judicial authorities of states parties to the 1961 convention should, in the absence of consent by the sending state, exclude illicitly obtained diplomatic documents and correspondence from judicial proceedings".  The ruling of the High Court failed to make any mention of the Chagossians or their right to reclaim their homeland.