Mauritius - UK Relations
Bilateral relations are generally friendly and substantive. The British Council plays an active role in Mauritius. It operates one of the largest Knowledge and Learning centres in the region and promotes English Language Teaching. We have around 250 British nationals registered as living in Mauritius with the British High Commission although there may be up to 5,000 in total (many of them dual nationals).
Britain has traditionally a significant market for Mauritius: in 2003 the UK bought around 29% of total Mauritian exports, valued at £325.01 million, rising to £343.31 million in 2004 and reaching about £390 million in 2007. Most of this was sugar, followed by clothing destined for British high street retailers. In 2007, British exports to Mauritius totalled approximately £60 million – mainly food products, light engineering products, and pharmaceuticals.
Britain is the third largest tourist market for Mauritius, and the fifth largest investor (behind France, South Africa, China and India). British investment in Mauritius is diverse, comprising banking services, project management, tobacco production, petroleum products, retail services, garment manufacture, BPO, call centres and tuna canning. Some of the British companies actively participating here are Barclays Bank plc, HSBC, BAT, Shell, KPMG, Grant Thornton, Pricewaterhouse Coopers, Coats Viyella, Accenture, and Princes Tuna Ltd. Severn Trent International Ltd won a tender for consultancy services with the Central Water Authority.
Mauritius is unable to exercise its sovereignty over parts of its territory, namely the Chagos Archipelago and Tromelin. Prior to granting Mauritius its independence on 12 March 1968, the United Kingdom excised on 8 November 1965 the Chagos Archipelago from the territory of Mauritius to purportedly create the so-called 'British Indian Ocean Territory'. This excision was carried out in violation of international law and United Nations General Assembly Resolutions 1514 of 14 December 1960, 2066 of 16 December 1965, 2232 of 20 December 1966 and 2357 of 19 December 1967.
The UK negotiated the detachment of the Chagos Archipelago with the elected representatives of Mauritius – the same people with whom it was, separately, negotiating the independence of Mauritius. The representatives of the Mauritian people had authority to negotiate in both negotiations, and in both cases they reached agreements.
On the detachment of the Chagos Archipelago, they negotiated first, compensation, which was paid; second, various rights for Mauritius; and third, this long-term commitment to cede the islands to Mauritius, when no longer needed for defense purposes.
UN General Assembly Resolution 1514 stipulates that "any attempt aimed at the partial or total disruption of the national unity and the territorial integrity of a country is incompatible with the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations". It clearly prohibits the dismemberment of any colonial territory prior to independence.
In addition to excising this integral part of our territory, the Mauritians living in the Chagos Archipelago were forcibly evicted from their home and moved to the main island of Mauritius in total disregard of their human rights. The Government of Mauritius is fully sensitive to their plight and their rightful aspiration to resettle in the Chagos Archipelago as per their legitimate right as a citizen of Mauritius.
Mauritius has consistently protested against the excision of the Chagos Archipelago and has unequivocally maintained that the Chagos Archipelago, including Diego Garcia, forms an integral part of its territory, under both Mauritian law and international law. Mauritius has also constantly pressed for the completion of its decolonisation process. For decades, Mauritius has called on the former colonial power to engage in order to find a fair and just solution, but these efforts have remained in vain so far.
An Arbitral Tribunal was established in the case brought by Mauritius against the United Kingdom under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea to challenge the legality of the 'marine protected area' purportedly established by the United Kingdom around the Chagos Archipelago. The Arbitral Tribunal ruled that the creation of the purported 'marine protected area' around the Chagos Archipelago by the United Kingdom was in violation of international law.
Two of the arbitrators found that the excision of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 showed "a complete disregard for the territorial integrity of Mauritius by the United Kingdom", in violation of the right to self-determination and that the United Kingdom is not the 'coastal State' in relation to the Chagos Archipelago. This finding has not been contradicted by the other members of the Arbitral Tribunal.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
