A British court on Tuesday refused permission for a legal challenge against the government over its agreement to transfer sovereignty of the disputed Chagos Islands to Mauritius, dealing a setback to campaigners seeking to block the deal.
The ruling by the High Court of Justice means the case against the British government’s foreign office will not proceed, after claimants argued that the government had failed to properly consult members of the displaced Chagossian community.
At the centre of the dispute is the Chagos Archipelago, a group of islands in the Indian Ocean that hosts a strategically important joint US–UK military base on its largest island, Diego Garcia.
Britain last year agreed a landmark deal with Mauritius to transfer sovereignty of the islands, ending decades of dispute over the territory’s status. Under the agreement, however, the UK would retain control of the Diego Garcia base through a 99-year lease, ensuring continued military operations there by the United States and Britain.
The deal forms part of efforts by the government of Keir Starmer to resolve long-running international legal and diplomatic disputes surrounding the territory.
But the agreement has drawn criticism from some politicians and campaigners, including Donald Trump, who last month described the deal as a “big mistake”, despite previously indicating that it may have been the best outcome available to the British government.
The case before the High Court was brought by three claimants, including Bertrice Pompe, a British national born on Diego Garcia who had earlier attempted to block the agreement.
Pompe and the other claimants argued that the UK’s Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office had acted unlawfully by failing to properly consult Chagossians — the indigenous inhabitants of the islands who were forcibly removed decades ago.
More Read
Many Chagossians were expelled from the archipelago between the late 1960s and early 1970s to make way for the construction of the military base on Diego Garcia, a move that has long been criticised by human rights groups and campaigners.
In her written ruling, Judge Mary Stacey acknowledged the difficult history surrounding the islands and the treatment of their inhabitants.
She referred to the “long and shameful history” of how the people of the Chagos Islands were treated during the period when they were removed from their homeland.
However, Stacey concluded that the new legal challenge effectively repeated arguments that had already been considered and rejected by British courts in earlier cases involving the territory.
Because of this, the court refused permission for the judicial review to proceed.
Legal observers say the decision underscores the difficulties campaigners face in trying to reopen longstanding legal disputes over the islands in British courts.
More Read
The UK government has long maintained that the agreement with Mauritius represents a pragmatic solution that preserves strategic military interests while addressing international criticism over the territory’s status.
For Mauritius, the deal is seen as a significant diplomatic victory in its decades-long campaign to reclaim sovereignty over the archipelago, which Britain separated from the colony of Mauritius shortly before granting it independence in 1968.
International pressure on London over the territory intensified after advisory opinions and resolutions by international bodies questioned Britain’s continued administration of the islands.
Despite the sovereignty transfer, the continued presence of the military base on Diego Garcia remains central to Western defence strategy in the Indian Ocean, particularly for US operations in the Middle East and Asia.
Britain’s foreign office did not immediately respond to requests for comment following the court’s decision.
Campaigners representing displaced Chagossians have said they will continue advocating for recognition of their rights and a greater role in decisions affecting the future of the islands.
