Danielle Selvon: “No objection to the military base on Diego Garcia”

Independent Member of Parliament, Mrs Danielle Selvon, has last week made a pledge during debates at the National Assembly for concerted actions between both sides of the House on the Chagos issue.

She called for all political parties to join hands with the all-party committee under the chairmanship of the Prime Minister Sir Anerood Jugnauth. This committee oversees the aspects of the country’s sovereignty claim on the Chagos archipelago which was illegally excised by the British colonial power prior to granting Mauritius its independence.

Your requested a common political platform on the Chagos. Is there a national political solidarity backing the actions of Sir Anerood Jugnauth regarding our sovereignty on the archipelago?

After the general elections in December 2014, I already pleaded for national unity on the Chagos issue. Fortunately, Sir Anerood Jugnauth has always strongly believed that the British dismembered the Mauritian territory in violation of international law, and that we did not have the means to oppose this outrageously illegal action. Once more, the country’s political establishment is deeply divided over a wide range of issues and I have been fearing, since our victory at the last general elections, that this mutual hostility could affect the national stance and give way to conflicting views that would again allow illegality get away scot-free. The Prime Minister has already taken the bull by its horns and set up an all-party parliamentary committee on the Chagos of which he chairs, alongside the leader of the opposition.

I am now pleading for all extra-parliamentary parties and the whole nation to be enlisted in the campaign for a return to legality regarding the sovereignty issue. I said in my speech in Parliament last week (Tuesday 5 July 2016) at adjournment, that the occupiers of the Chagos have violated no less than 10 conventions and international laws starting with UN Resolution 1514, which prohibits any dismemberment of the national territory of a colony prior to granting it independence. SAJ fully agreed with me and even asked me to join the inter-party parliamentary committee.

Both sides of the House applauded my stance. I am therefore confident that national unity is in the making, but my worry is that some external forces are trying to push the Chagossians into betraying the Mauritian nation of which they form part. Former inhabitants of the Chagos were sent from Mauritius to work mainly in the copra industry and the fishing sector, and their products were exported Mauritius. They are of Mauritian origin and denying Mauritian sovereignty would be tantamount to betraying their nation, who gave them work and a livelihood on the Chagos and in Mauritius after their exile here.

You mentioned some proposals which could be used by the Prime Minister at the UN General Assembly and the International Court of Justice. Can you elaborate on these?

Surely. At the UN General Assembly, the issue of illegality can be broadened as many international laws and conventions have been violated by the occupying powers – including as concluded unanimously by the judges of the UN’s International Tribunal of the Law Of the Sea – several violations of the UN Convention of the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982.

Our stance before the International Court of Justice is too bulky to be summed up in this interview. Mauritius will demonstrate to the judges several aspects that include the above mentioned violations of international laws and conventions as well as various actions that make of the Chagos a ‘black hole of illegality’, to use an expression utilised by the internationally reputed British jurist, Sir Geoffrey Robertson, QC, regarding the UK-US activities, including torture of detainees, and more. To the list, I add the scandalous deprivation of the Chagossians of their homes and leaving to tourists sailing past the region, 59 of the 60 islands of the archipelago for them to enjoy and to pollute, while Chagossians are living in exile.

What are the chances of the British government handling back the Chagos to Mauritius?

They have been pledging to give back the Chagos for several years and actually had signed in 1965 an agreement to acknowledge Mauritian sovereignty, should the islands be no more needed for defence purposes. Now, they have reneged on that written undertaking before ITLOS, to which the judges have unanimously replied and concluded that such undertaking along with others, are “legally binding” on the UK. The conclusions of the judges are as follows:

“In relation to the merits of the Parties’ dispute, the Tribunal, having found, inter alia, (1) that the United Kingdom’s undertaking to ensure that fishing rights in the Chagos Archipelago would remain available to Mauritius as far as practicable is legally binding in so far as it relates to the territorial sea; (2) that the United Kingdom’s undertaking to return the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius when no longer needed for defence purposes is legally binding; and (3) that the United Kingdom’s undertaking to preserve the benefit of any minerals or oil discovered in or near the Chagos Archipelago for Mauritius is legally binding;”

Are you convinced that the majority of Chagossians – those who were exiled to Mauritius and their descendants – want to go back to the archipelago?

No, l’m not! There are already two main groups – (even three, with Fernand Mandarin of the Comité Social Chagossiens believing in sovereignty and accepting fully that there are Mauritians) – one led by Olivier Bancoult in Mauritius, the Group Réfugiés Chagos, supported by government of Mauritius funds, with Mr. Bancoult now refusing to support Mauritius sovereignty, the other led by Allen Vincatassin in the UK which wants Mauritius to lose any right of sovereignty, even secondary sovereignty, to permanent UK sovereignty.

This is why, believing that the rank and file of the Chagossian people in Mauritius and in UK should be directly addressed at meetings organised by an all-party committee headed by SAJ. We should explain to them that the Chagos belongs to the Mauritian population as a whole, including them. We can even help them elect a “council in exile” under the aegis of the Prime Minister’s Office based on the model used for Rodrigues.

In fact, SAJ needs to doubly reassure the UK and the US, that Mauritius has no objection to the military base, as we also do need protection from international terrorism as long as it will threaten our region and beyond.

If both superpowers readily accept our demands and Chagossians are allowed to resettle. Should another compensation be given to them?

As I just said, there will be more than compensation. They will be employed, particular in the agricultural and fishing sectors. They will export their products to Mauritius and even sell them on the international markets. They will earn their livelihood through eco-tourism activities. The UK’s resettlement plan, albeit illegally done in the back of Mauritius, does not offer any compensation. Ours will be more realistic and adapted to any island of our region.