The Last Colony: Authored by Philippe Sands
MC-OPED 002: Today, as the Maldives reaffirms its rightful and long-overlooked claim to the Chagos Archipelago, it is essential for Maldivian scholars, lawyers, and policymakers, along with members of the international community -especially those involved in decolonization and international adjudication - to critically examine the misconceptions being circulated abroad regarding whose narrative is being represented globally on this issue. At the heart of this narrative architecture has been Philippe Sands KC, a leading international lawyer and human rights defender, who has served both as Mauritius's counsel in the advisory proceedings as well as the author of The Last Colony: A Tale of Exile, Justice and Britain's Colonial Legacy, which has had a transformative effect on the public and institutional perception of the Chagos question.
We certainly won't deny its usefulness as a documentary. As a finely tuned diplomatic instrument for Mauritius, it tells one half of the story - albeit one carefully enhanced in the editing room. While undeniably engaging, it ultimately functions as mood-shaping, scene-setting propaganda: a polished narrative designed to make Mauritius' position appear understandable and inevitable. A cosy strategy, yes - but one that leaves the other half of history buried off-screen. For all its emotionalism and moral simplicity, The Last Colony is less documentary than a political brief to bolster Mauritius's version of history, conveniently marginalising the Maldives' legitimate and historically grounded position. Sands offers a partial history of decolonisation, trafficking in the conflation of legal advocacy with objective history, reducing a multivalent, highly contested dispute to a simple story about colonial guilt and redemption through Port Louis.
The issues it raises require urgent attention from Maldivians and the international community that has invested in the decolonisation process. Sands' sway in the ICJ, ITLOS, and more expansive UN forums has reshaped juridical outcomes and perceptions, albeit at the expense of truth-telling and local fairness. Accordingly, it is imperative for scholars of mediation and international law to rigorously examine the distortions introduced by his Janus-faced conduct—oscillating between legal advocate and public narrator—not merely to correct the legal record, but to safeguard the decolonisation discourse from being hijacked by geopolitical clientelism masquerading as global justice.