Asked by: Daniel Kawczynski (Conservative - Shrewsbury and Atcham)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, with reference to the Press Release of the Universal Postal Union, published on 27 August 2021, UPU adopts UN resolution on Chagos Archipelago, what steps he is taking to ensure that British stamps continue to be used in the British Indian Ocean Territory.
Answered by Nigel Adams
We are disappointed by the Universal Postal Union's resolution. The UK has no doubt as to our sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean Territory, which has been under continuous British sovereignty since 1814.
We are considering further the practical impact of the UPU resolution on the use of BIOT stamps for the BIOT postal service. UK stamps continue to be used for the UK military postal service, accessible to UK military and civilian contractors.
Asked by: Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 15 July 2021 to Question 31362 on the British Indian Ocean Territory, whether the UK's 1965 undertaking referred to in that answer and which was found to be legally binding by the Arbitral Tribunal of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea in its Dispositif of 18 March 2015 was to return the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius rather than to cede sovereignty.
Answered by Nigel Adams
The United Kingdom has no doubt about its sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT, also referred to as the Chagos Archipelago), which has been under continuous British sovereignty since 1814. The United Kingdom has, however, a long-standing commitment, first made in 1965, to cede BIOT to Mauritius when it is no longer required for defence purposes. We stand by that commitment. Use of the term 'return' in this connection has reflected the fact that before 1965 the Chagos Archipelago was administered as a dependency of Mauritius.
Asked by: Baroness Whitaker (Labour - Life peer)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask Her Majesty's Government, further to the Written Answer by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon on 15 February (HL12876) and the judgment by the Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea on 28 January concerning the delimitation of a maritime boundary between the Exclusive Economic Zones of Mauritius and Maldives in the vicinity of the Chagos Archipelago, what assessment they have made of whether the UK and the Republic of the Maldives are also entitled to agree a delimitation of a maritime boundary between the UK (in respect of its claim to the British Indian Ocean Territory) and the Republic of the Maldives.
Answered by Lord Ahmad of Wimbledon - Minister of State (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office)
The judgment by the Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS) was in relation to the delimitation of a maritime boundary claimed by Mauritius to exist between Mauritius and the Republic of Maldives in the Indian Ocean. The UK was not a party to those proceedings, which can have no effect for the UK or for maritime delimitation between the UK (in respect of the British Indian Ocean Territory) and Maldives.
Asked by: Andrew Mitchell (Conservative - Sutton Coldfield)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 1 March 2021 to Question 155190 on the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission, whether the UN Food and Agriculture Commission has accepted the UK application for membership of the Indian Ocean Tuna Commission as a coastal state; and what assessment he has made of the positions taken in relation to the UK’s claim to act as a coastal state by the UN General Assembly, International Court of Justice and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea.
Answered by James Duddridge
The UK deposited an instrument of accession to the Agreement for the Establishment of the Indian Ocean Commission Tuna Commission (IOTC) with the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) on 14 December 2020. The Agreement entered into force for the United Kingdom on 22 December 2020 as confirmed by IOTC Circular 2021-02 on 7 January (https://tinyurl.com/vvthj86k) and by the FAO on 14 January (https://tinyurl.com/vp3vrbad).
The UK is aware of the judgment delivered on 28 January by the Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. This judgement was formed to deal with the dispute concerning delimitation of a maritime boundary claimed by Mauritius to exist between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean. The UK is not a party to these proceedings, which can have no effect for the UK or for maritime delimitation between the UK (in respect of the British Indian Ocean Territory) and the Republic of the Maldives. The International Court of Justice's opinion on the Chagos Archipelago is advisory and not legally binding. The UK voted against General Assembly resolution 73/295 and we remain firmly of the view that the International Court of Justice and General Assembly are not the appropriate fora for resolving what is fundamentally a bilateral matter of disputed sovereignty between two UN member states. The resolution is non-binding.
Asked by: Lisa Nandy (Labour - Wigan)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, pursuant to the Answer of 8 January to Question 148829 on British Indian Ocean Territory: Navy, whether the answer from the Ministry of Defence represents his Department's policy on the future sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago.
Answered by Nigel Adams
Yes. We have no doubt about our sovereignty over the British Indian Ocean Territory, which has been continuous since 1814. Mauritius has never held sovereignty over the Archipelago, and we do not recognise its claim.
We remain open to dialogue with Mauritius on matters of shared interest, including BIOT and its Marine Protected Area (MPA).
Asked by: Patrick Grady (Scottish National Party - Glasgow North)
Question to the Ministry of Defence:
To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, pursuant to the Answer of 8 February 2021 to Question 148829 on British Indian Ocean Territory: Navy, which stated that the UK has a 12 nautical mile territorial sea in the Chagos Archipelago, when that limit was first claimed by the UK Government; and how information on that limit was promulgated by the UK Government.
Answered by James Heappey
The reference to 12 nautical miles refers to the Mauritian claim as put in the original question on 8 February 2020; a claim which the UK does not accept. Nevertheless, I am grateful for the opportunity to provide clarification. The UK claims a territorial sea of three nautical miles around the British Indian Ocean Territory.
Asked by: Stephen Doughty (Labour (Co-op) - Cardiff South and Penarth)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what total cost to the public purse is of (a) direct and (b) indirect expenditure by his on external legal advice on disputes over the Chagos Islands.
Answered by Nigel Adams
According to the available records, the FCDO has spent £5,841,662 million on external legal services relating to disputes concerning the British Indian Ocean Territory. This includes Government Legal Department costs, as well as counsel fees, in respect of the arbitral proceedings brought by Mauritius under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, the advisory proceedings before the International Court of Justice, as well as relevant domestic litigation. It also includes the UK's contribution to the cost of the tribunal established for the arbitral proceedings brought by Mauritius.
Asked by: Lisa Nandy (Labour - Wigan)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what steps the Government is taking in response to (a) UN General Assembly resolution 73/295 and (b) the judgment of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea on 28 January 2021 on the future sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago.
Answered by Nigel Adams
The United Kingdom voted against General Assembly resolution 73/295 and we remain firmly of the view that the International Court of Justice and General Assembly are not the appropriate fora for resolving what is fundamentally a bilateral matter of disputed sovereignty between two UN member states. The resolution is non-binding. Nevertheless, the United Kingdom contributed to the Secretary-General's report, made pursuant to the resolution.
The UK was not a party to the proceedings of the Special Chamber of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS), which have no effect for the UK or for maritime delimitation between the UK (in respect of the British Indian Ocean Territory) and the Republic of the Maldives.
Asked by: Alan Brown (Scottish National Party - Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what discussions he has had with his US counterpart on the ruling from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea which confirmed that the Chagos archipelago and surrounding waters fall within the sovereignty of Mauritius; and what assessment he has made of the implications of that ruling for the US airbase lease.
Answered by Nigel Adams
The Foreign Secretary has not had any discussions on the ITLOS ruling with his US or Mauritian counterparts. The UK is not a party to these proceedings, which can have no effect for the UK or for maritime delimitation between the UK (in respect of the British Indian Ocean Territory) and the Republic of the Maldives.
We remain open to dialogue with Mauritius on matters of shared interest, including BIOT and its Marine Protected Area (MPA), and we have ongoing discussions with the US on a range of issues including BIOT.
Asked by: Alan Brown (Scottish National Party - Kilmarnock and Loudoun)
Question to the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office:
To ask the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs, what discussions he has had with his Mauritian counterpart on the ruling from the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea which that confirmed that the Chagos archipelago and surrounding waters fall within the sovereignty of Mauritius; and if he will make a statement.
Answered by Nigel Adams
The Foreign Secretary has not had any discussions on the ITLOS ruling with his US or Mauritian counterparts. The UK is not a party to these proceedings, which can have no effect for the UK or for maritime delimitation between the UK (in respect of the British Indian Ocean Territory) and the Republic of the Maldives.
We remain open to dialogue with Mauritius on matters of shared interest, including BIOT and its Marine Protected Area (MPA), and we have ongoing discussions with the US on a range of issues including BIOT.