Mauritius UK is using the government money to pay its loan instead of indigenous rehabilitation, Independent Can reveal, rule Anger on the deal of Sir Kir Stmper to hand over the archipelago.
It comes after presenting a formal legal communication to the United Nations Human Rights Committee as part of an attempt Challenge the legitimacy of the deal.
In an agreement signed last month, Britain abandoned Mauritius the sovereignty of the island region and leased the US-UK military base over Diego Garcia. £ 101m per year for 99 years,
Under the deal, an £ 40 million ‘Future Fund’ trust was established by the UK, so that hundreds of people native to the islands were excluded more than half a century before the British and US governments created a military base.
It is to be funded by the UK and is established by Mauritius, but the budget of Mauritius for 2025/26 indicates that the ministers will use any money for the trust fund for three years in the agreement.
The budget presented to the Mauritius Parliament on Wednesday stated that “Revenue from Chagos … will be used for loan repayment for the first 3 years”.
It says that the government “will start a groundwork to install the future funds, for which the receipts from the Chagos deal will be transferred from the year four. But there is no details in the budget how much money will be invested for it every year.
The revelation comes despite the two countries saying that they wanted to “identify”[e] Past’s mistakes “and” are conscious that the previous treatment of Chagosian has left a deep regrettable legacy, and [they are] Committed to support the welfare of all Chagosians ”.
There is no one left on the islands to participate or participate in a referendum. In an embarrassing episode during dicolonization, they were deported, with the most settled in Mauritius, Seychelles and UK. Many oppose the deal, but their legal tasks have failed.
Campaign Group Chagosian Voice’s gene Francois-Nelan told Independent He is “surprised but surprised”.
He said, “Chagosians are being erased from both the history and future of Mauritius. The government is more interested in using our suffering to balance its books compared to giving justice,” he said.
“Instead, the budget underlines the priorities of development for the rodrigues and the next regions, which is perfectly worthy of investment, but completely leaves Chagosian, many people whose displacement gave birth to an international legal battle, Mauritius continued wages.”
He said: “Despite repeated claims of sovereignty and responsibility on the Chagos Islands, the government of Mauritius has once again failed to accept or prioritize the rights and welfare of Chagosian people in the 2025/26 National Budget.”
The case is being brought to the United Nations Berndate by campaigners by Dugsey And Burtris Pompe, criticizes the UK-Mauritius deal, “interaction and conclusion without the participation or consent of the Chagosians, which have been displaced from their motherland since the orchestrated exile between 1965 and 1973.
The preacher says: “It clearly prevents their return to Diego Garcia, historically the most populous island, and in the United States, lease it for 99 years and further the colonial and strategic use of the region.
“The agreement forms a crystallization of a historical injustice and threatens to permanent the exclusion of an entire people from its original land.”
While the committee’s decision is not legally binding, it bears important moral and legal rights.
As a semi -niyal body, its rules shape international legal norms and state obligations – meaning that if they rule in favor of Chagosian, it will significantly reduce the government’s decision to sign the treaty.
Ms. Pompe said: “The fight is not over. There is nothing in that treaty for Chagosian and we will fight.”
He said: “I have pity on poor souls in number 10 press office, who are being ordered to justify the betrler of the Care Stmper of Chagosian.
The deal was signed after the legal pride of the months in May, and even the night was nightly challenged by the indigenous campaigners, which initially stagnated the treaty, but was later rejected.
FCDO has been approached for comment.
