 |
| Maldivians for Chagos |
This judgment, which grants Mauritius complete maritime jurisdiction over the Chagos Archipelago before there has been any valid or effective decolonization, is a legal trick that conflates aspirational sovereignty with established legal ownership. It is a clear violation not only of the United Nations Charter and the international law of self-determination but also of the essence of UNCLOS, which states that, without effective sovereignty on land, there can be no maritime delimitation.
We are also here to remind the world that:
The 2019 ICJ advisory opinion, although an instrument of moral suasion, is non-binding and has not been operationalized. The Kingdom still maintains physical, administrative, and military control over the Chagos Islands, built around Mauritius' claim, which is at best symbolic. As an original stakeholder in the Chagos region, a sovereign state since 1965, the Maldives has been disenfranchised by a prioritized geography over legal justice.
The 2019 ICJ advisory opinion, although an instrument of moral suasion, is non-binding and has not been operationalized. The Kingdom still maintains physical, administrative, and military control over the Chagos Islands, built around Mauritius' claim, which is at best symbolic. As an original stakeholder in the Chagos region, a sovereign state since 1965, the Maldives has been disenfranchised by a prioritized geography over legal justice.
The decision can be seen as nothing other than a judicial annexation, in peacetime, of a disputed land and maritime region - done not through negotiation or a decolonization by a tribunal's presumptuous revision of sovereignty. It is a startling departure from the past and now risks upending legal norms in the developing world.
We thus put forth the following call:
To the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonisation (C-24): We call on you to stake your claim as guardians of genuine decolonization, not facilitators of easy postcolonial disentanglements. Revisit the Chagos process, engaging all the original sovereign stakeholders, including the Maldives.
To the International Court of Justice: We demand a reconsideration of the legal implications of your advisory opinion, particularly how it has been weaponized by the maritime territory rather than for historical justice. You can do better than that!
To the Judges of ITLOS:
Your tribunal has gone too far. We respectfully request a recall of, and reconsideration by you of, your judgment to restore the rule of law and the integrity of the maritime regime of the western Indian Ocean, based on the apparent legal fact that maritime delimitation cannot precede decolonization. Sovereignty is not granted through legal theatre, but through fact, possession, and the will of the people.
Decolonization is a convenient tool for opportunistic maritime expansion. That is a solemn legal and historical duty owed to people, not to states.
The Maldives has never succumbed to piracy in its historical maritime domain, and it will not do so in the future.
Issued by:
Maldivians for Chagos
Malé, Maldives
17 June 2025
"Submission is not in the genes. "We receive history - and we will preserve it."