| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Philippe Sands on International Law - a very relevant lecture | |
| Posted by: | Steven Rose | |
| Date/Time: | 05/03/26 23:09:00 |
| My question, of course , was ironic. I heard Philippe Sands on the radio justifying handing over the Chagos Islands to Mauritius. His argument was that if Britain held onto the islands it would be in breach of ‘international law’, given an advisory judgment by a panel of judges at the ICH and a vote at the UN. Paradoxically Philippe Sands is worried that Britain might be failing in a duty to ‘de-colonise’ the Chagos Islands but shows no concern for the native Chagossians, who having been colonised by the British now face colonisation by the Mauritians. Did he offer any justification for ignoring the wishes of 5he Chagossians in his lecture? |