British Indian Ocean Territory: Sovereignty Debate
Full Debate: Read Full DebateDepartment: Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
Ben Obese-Jecty
Main Page: Ben Obese-Jecty (Conservative - Huntingdon)Department Debates - View all Ben Obese-Jecty's debates with the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office
British Indian Ocean Territory: Sovereignty
Ben Obese-Jecty Excerpts(3 weeks, 3 days ago)
Commons ChamberRead Full debate Read Hansard Text Watch Debate Read Debate Ministerial Extracts
Urgent Questions are proposed each morning by backbench MPs, and up to two may be selected each day by the Speaker. Chosen Urgent Questions are announced 30 minutes before Parliament sits each day.
Each Urgent Question requires a Government Minister to give a response on the debate topic.
This information is provided by Parallel Parliament and does not comprise part of the offical record
Stephen Doughty
I will not take any lessons from a party that fawns over Vladimir Putin.
Ben Obese-Jecty (Huntingdon) (Con)
In the Defence Secretary’s statement on 22 May, he stated with regard to potential legal rulings against us that
“The most proximate, and the most potentially serious, is the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.”—[Official Report, 22 May 2025; Vol. 767, c. 1291.]
The US, which operates the base, is not even a signatory to UNCLOS. How would ITLOS have ruled a binding legal judgment that we would have recognised? It is notable that ITLOS has not been mentioned since that statement?
Stephen Doughty
I am confused—I have mentioned ITLOS on a number of occasions, including just a moment ago. The long-standing view of the United Kingdom is that the UK would not have a realistic prospect of successfully defending its legal position on sovereignty in such litigation. Even if we chose to ignore binding judgments made against us—we would not do so—their legal effect on third countries and international organisations would give rise to real impacts to the operation of the base and the delivery of its national security functions.
International organisations have already adopted decisions based on Mauritian sovereignty, and others would follow suit following such litigation. That could affect the electromagnetic spectrum, access to the base by air and by sea, and the ability to patrol the maritime area around the base and to support the base’s critical national security functions. Further, the UK would likely face a provisional measures order in a matter of weeks. The position is clear, and we have explained it. The hon. Member’s previous Government knew exactly the same. [Interruption.] However much he shouts and however much he does not like the arguments, they are the facts.