Diego Garcia Judgement Day
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Diego Garcia Judgement Day
Grauniad: Day of judgment in the Lords for evicted Chagos islanders
The long-running legal battle between the British government and the Chagos islanders over their eviction from their homes in the Indian Ocean nearly 40 years ago will reach its conclusion in the House of Lords this morning. The law lords will deliver their ruling on whether the surviving islanders have the right to return, after being removed from the archipelago to make way for the base on Diego Garcia.
Nine Chagossians flew in from their current homes in Mauritius yesterday, joining exiles who have settled in Crawley to hear the judgment of Lords Bingham, Hoffman, Rodger, Carswell and Mance.
Today's ruling is the last stage of a lengthy legal battle launched in the name of Olivier Bancoult, one of the evicted islanders, in 1998.
Both the divisional court and the court of appeal have ruled in favour of the Chagossians' right to return to the outer islands, which do not include Diego Garcia, but the Foreign Office appealed against those judgments in the Lords. "We remain hopeful that once and for all there will be a conclusion that will see justice for the Chagossian people," said Bashir Khan of the Chagos Refugees Group UK.........
The long-running legal battle between the British government and the Chagos islanders over their eviction from their homes in the Indian Ocean nearly 40 years ago will reach its conclusion in the House of Lords this morning. The law lords will deliver their ruling on whether the surviving islanders have the right to return, after being removed from the archipelago to make way for the base on Diego Garcia.
Nine Chagossians flew in from their current homes in Mauritius yesterday, joining exiles who have settled in Crawley to hear the judgment of Lords Bingham, Hoffman, Rodger, Carswell and Mance.
Today's ruling is the last stage of a lengthy legal battle launched in the name of Olivier Bancoult, one of the evicted islanders, in 1998.
Both the divisional court and the court of appeal have ruled in favour of the Chagossians' right to return to the outer islands, which do not include Diego Garcia, but the Foreign Office appealed against those judgments in the Lords. "We remain hopeful that once and for all there will be a conclusion that will see justice for the Chagossian people," said Bashir Khan of the Chagos Refugees Group UK.........
From BBC News:
Diego Garcia is part of the Chagos Archipelago in the British Indian Ocean Territories. The Americans are allowed to base aircraft there. But they have no territorial rights.
The US has also indicated that any return of islanders would compromise its military presence.
According to Jeremy Corbyn, Labour MP for Islington North, who has voiced his support for the cause of the Chagossians in the House of Commons, the islanders were "victims of big-power politics".
He said: "These islanders were inconvenient to the nuclear wishes of the United States. This was an injustice of mammoth proportions.
"It was a racist approach to a group of people who had looked after the islands, preserved the islands, who were just in the way."
Most of the islanders were sent to Mauritius and the Seychelles where they encountered racism and discrimination as well as poverty.
In 2002, the islanders were given the right to British passports.
According to Jeremy Corbyn, Labour MP for Islington North, who has voiced his support for the cause of the Chagossians in the House of Commons, the islanders were "victims of big-power politics".
He said: "These islanders were inconvenient to the nuclear wishes of the United States. This was an injustice of mammoth proportions.
"It was a racist approach to a group of people who had looked after the islands, preserved the islands, who were just in the way."
Most of the islanders were sent to Mauritius and the Seychelles where they encountered racism and discrimination as well as poverty.
In 2002, the islanders were given the right to British passports.
Diego Garcia is part of the Chagos Archipelago in the British Indian Ocean Territories. The Americans are allowed to base aircraft there. But they have no territorial rights.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Far far away
Age: 53
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just how, exactly, could they compromise the US military presence? A handful of aged attack donkeys and some sugar-cane blow-pipes? 
Last edited by D-IFF_ident; 22nd Oct 2008 at 08:57. Reason: Poor gramma
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
Islanders Lose Right of Return Case
BBC: Chagos exiles ruling overturned
Exiled residents of the Chagos Islands have had the right to return to their Indian Ocean homeland overturned by the House of Lords.
The government won its appeal against a court decision that had ruled in favour of 2,000 former residents of the British overseas territory. The Law Lords decision is the final judgement in the long-running case.
The former residents were evicted from the islands between 1967 and 1971 as part of a secret deal with the US. In 2000, High Court judges ruled that Chagossians could return to 65 of the islands. In 2004 the government used the royal prerogative - exercised by ministers in the Queen's name - to effectively nullify the decision.
Last year, the court overturned that order and rejected the government argument that the royal prerogative was immune from scrutiny. The government had asked the Lords to rule on the issue.
The exiled residents had hoped that if the Law Lords ruling had gone in their favour, their heritage could be rebuilt around a new tourist industry.
Exiled residents of the Chagos Islands have had the right to return to their Indian Ocean homeland overturned by the House of Lords.
The government won its appeal against a court decision that had ruled in favour of 2,000 former residents of the British overseas territory. The Law Lords decision is the final judgement in the long-running case.
The former residents were evicted from the islands between 1967 and 1971 as part of a secret deal with the US. In 2000, High Court judges ruled that Chagossians could return to 65 of the islands. In 2004 the government used the royal prerogative - exercised by ministers in the Queen's name - to effectively nullify the decision.
Last year, the court overturned that order and rejected the government argument that the royal prerogative was immune from scrutiny. The government had asked the Lords to rule on the issue.
The exiled residents had hoped that if the Law Lords ruling had gone in their favour, their heritage could be rebuilt around a new tourist industry.
More bang for your buck
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: land of the clanger
Age: 82
Posts: 3,512
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Law Lords decision is the final judgement in the long-running case
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is disgraceful. Our government has done all it can to further the liberal agenda of promoting 'human rights'. Here it has had a chance to do the right thing but won't because of Uncle Sam.
Jack Ryan,
Agreed.
A disgraceful decision.
Agreed.
A disgraceful decision.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 734
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sometimes doing the right thing is a bit inconvenient, don't you know? Interesting though that even the House of Lords can be spiked when it suits - another example of our just and fair society.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
D-IFF_ident, ORAC has the answer to your question...
Gobs of whoevers from wherever, arriving by whatever means... ya think undesirables might be among them?
The exiled residents had hoped that if the Law Lords ruling had gone in their favour, their heritage could be rebuilt around a new tourist industry.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gobs of whoevers from wherever, arriving by whatever means... ya think undesirables might be among them?
Not only is the original eviction and this upholding of the eviction inhumane, it also damages the reputation of the UK.
Disgraceful. Only a huge public show of support in the UK, plus a change of government, can help them now.
I have dual Oz/UK citizenship, as my entire family up to myself were born in the UK. Despite this I have not lived there and I don't understand how the European and British legal systems come together.
Would the European court of human rights have juristiction and would the British government have to comply if it found in favour of the Chargos Islanders?
What about the European court of human rights can they not appeal to them after the HofL? After all they've much more of a human rights case than some of these bloody criminals that get thousands out of the government.
Would the European court of human rights have juristiction and would the British government have to comply if it found in favour of the Chargos Islanders?
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: England
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Trojan, without referenda/ums the UK government has signed up to increasingly controlling European law; we have a few vetoes and the British pound remaining. The interesting thing about this case is that letting the Chagossians return would be the socialist / European / 'human rights' way of doing things. The fact that the Lords have not voted in this way indicates who is really in power around here: the United States of America. It's quite sad if you look at the Chagos on Google Earth, they do look like a beautiful chain of islands. I can certainly imagine Diego Garcia sits unpleasantly with its BX and Taco Bell.
Are you aware your username is the same as the top-selling US condom?
Are you aware your username is the same as the top-selling US condom?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Disagree with the lot of you.
So what if a couple of thousand people have been inconvenienced?
Compulsory purchase is nothing new, and it was all done during the cold war when important things were at stake.
Defence is important
So what if a couple of thousand people have been inconvenienced?
Compulsory purchase is nothing new, and it was all done during the cold war when important things were at stake.
Defence is important
Tourist.
I take it you're talking about YOUR defence, and I think the people have been a little bit more than just 'inconvenienced'.
I don't recall the entire population being evicted from Addu Attol to make way for RAF Gan.
I take it you're talking about YOUR defence, and I think the people have been a little bit more than just 'inconvenienced'.
I don't recall the entire population being evicted from Addu Attol to make way for RAF Gan.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: firmly on dry land
Age: 81
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
They weren't evicted from Addu Atoll but they were certainly not able to stay on Gan overnight.
I don't know the facts for sure but I believe the Male Government insisted that the causeway linking Gan and Hiatdo (?) was removed so that the workers could either wade to work or row in a dhoni.
They recognised that the British presence could enrich the Addu natives to a greater extent than the rest of the archipelago and were keen that we did not contaminate them with goods that would be unsustainable when the British lease expired.
Whether the eviction was British or Male, I don't know, but evicted they were.
I don't know the facts for sure but I believe the Male Government insisted that the causeway linking Gan and Hiatdo (?) was removed so that the workers could either wade to work or row in a dhoni.
They recognised that the British presence could enrich the Addu natives to a greater extent than the rest of the archipelago and were keen that we did not contaminate them with goods that would be unsustainable when the British lease expired.
Whether the eviction was British or Male, I don't know, but evicted they were.
If we are going to make legal decisions based on revisionist history...
...let's pay a sizeable percentage of our GDP to all the African govts from whom we nicked a lot of people to make into slaves. After all, these govts seem to argue that their development has been hindered over the centuries due to the slave trade and depletion of their populations (wouldn't have anything to do with corruption and tribal politics wuold it?!)
...let's pay a sizeable percentage of our GDP to the Abbos and Maoris who we 'massacred' in order to grab their land. Oh the shame of our colonial legacy...!
...let's pay a sizeable percentage of our GDP to the cities of Dresden, Hamburg, Cologne...get the picture?
...let's pay a sizeable percentage of our GDP to all the African govts from whom we nicked a lot of people to make into slaves. After all, these govts seem to argue that their development has been hindered over the centuries due to the slave trade and depletion of their populations (wouldn't have anything to do with corruption and tribal politics wuold it?!)
...let's pay a sizeable percentage of our GDP to the Abbos and Maoris who we 'massacred' in order to grab their land. Oh the shame of our colonial legacy...!
...let's pay a sizeable percentage of our GDP to the cities of Dresden, Hamburg, Cologne...get the picture?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Training Risky, just because nations were allowed to get away with various genocides in the past does not excuse them from paying fair and proper reparation now. Holding nations to account for crimes is just as important as holding individuals to account.
If nations were obliged to pay reparations for unjust wars in a systematic fashion, then the USA should have paid reparation for the invasion of Vietnam. If they had been obliged to pay reparations for the war crimes they committed in Vietnam, you can be sure there would be a lot of entirely innocent Iraqis and Afghans still alive today. They (and us) may have also hesitated in invading Iraq on an equally fabricated and unnecessary premise if they were obliged to pay reparations if their justification for the invasion was proven incorrect (which was the case - no WMD).
If nations were obliged to pay reparations for unjust wars in a systematic fashion, then the USA should have paid reparation for the invasion of Vietnam. If they had been obliged to pay reparations for the war crimes they committed in Vietnam, you can be sure there would be a lot of entirely innocent Iraqis and Afghans still alive today. They (and us) may have also hesitated in invading Iraq on an equally fabricated and unnecessary premise if they were obliged to pay reparations if their justification for the invasion was proven incorrect (which was the case - no WMD).
just because nations were allowed to get away with various genocides in the past does not excuse them from paying fair and proper reparation now
Does that mean the Italians should be paying us reparations for the slaves taken from Britain during the Roman invasion? Or the Norwegians and Danes paying reparations for all the raping and pillaging? Or? Or ? Or? We, they were the powerful state(s) at the relevant time in HISTORY. It happened, get over it!! In a few years it will be the turn of the Chinese and the Indians.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: bored
Posts: 532
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Roland you miss my point. Putting in place a system that punishes war crimes commited in the near past will prevent them recurring. We can't revisit every conflict in human history, but we can still revisit those injustices where the direct first-generation victims are still alive today - eg from WW2 onwards. This would include the Chagos Islanders, amongst many others.
I disagree with claims by second-generation descendants of victims (eg the jewish compensation industry in USA against anybody they can possibly sue). We have to start somewhere in history, so let's make it now. and start properly compensating living victims of war crimes.
Incidentally, I link into that, the UK victims of our current stupid and unnecessary wars. I think that it is very interesting to see the growing power and influence of UK coroners over the democratic process. Once families of servicemen are properly compensated for following orders to execute unjust wars, then it will discourage governments from usurping the legal and democratic process to enter war, which was what happened in the lead up to Telic.
I disagree with claims by second-generation descendants of victims (eg the jewish compensation industry in USA against anybody they can possibly sue). We have to start somewhere in history, so let's make it now. and start properly compensating living victims of war crimes.
Incidentally, I link into that, the UK victims of our current stupid and unnecessary wars. I think that it is very interesting to see the growing power and influence of UK coroners over the democratic process. Once families of servicemen are properly compensated for following orders to execute unjust wars, then it will discourage governments from usurping the legal and democratic process to enter war, which was what happened in the lead up to Telic.