DOCSLIB.ORG

Minutes of Public Hearings

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Minutes of Public Hearings INTERNATIONAL TRIBUNAL FOR THE LAW OF THE SEA TRIBUNAL INTERNATIONAL DU DROIT DE LA MER MINUTES OF PUBLIC SITTINGS MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC SITTINGS HELD FROM 13 TO 19 OCTOBER 2020 Dispute concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean (Mauritius/Maldives), Preliminary Objections PROCES-VERBAL DES AUDIENCES PUBLIQUES PROCES-VERBAL DES AUDIENCES PUBLIQUES TENUES DU 13 AU 19 OCTOBRE 2020 Differend relatif a la delimitation de la frontiere maritime entre Maurice et Jes Maldives dans /'ocean /ndien (Maurice/Maldives), exceptions preliminaires For ease of use, in addition to the continuous pagination, this volume also contains, between square brackets at the beginning of each statement, a reference to the pagination of the revised verbatim records. En vue de faciliter !'utilisation de l'ouvrage, le present volume comporte, outre une pagination continue, !'indication, entre crochets, au debut de chaque expose, de la pagination des proces-verbaux revises. Minutes of the Public Sittings held from 13 to 19 October 2020 Proces-verbal des audiences publiques tenues du 13 au 19 octobre 2020 13 October 2020, p.m. PUBLIC SITTING HELD ON 13 OCTOBER 2020, 2 P.M. Special Chamber Present: President PAIK; Judges JESUS, PAWLAK, Y ANAi, BOUQUET AIA, HEIDAR, CHADHA; Judges ad hoe OXMAN, SCHRIJVER; Registrar HINRICHS OYARCE. Mauritius is represented by: Mr Dheerendra Kumar Dabee, G.O.S.K., S.C., Solicitor-General, Attorney General's Office, as Agent; Mr Jagdish Dharamchand Koonjul, G.O.S.K., Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Republic of Mauritius to the United Nations in New York, United States of America, as Co-Agent; and Mr Philippe Sands QC, Professor of International Law at University College London, Barrister at Matrix Chambers, London, United Kingdom, Mr Paul S. Reichler, Attorney-at-Law, Foley Hoag LLP, member of the Bar of the district of Columbia, United States of America, Mr Pierre Klein, Professor oflnternational Law at the Universite Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium, as Counsel and Advocates; Mr Remi Reichhold, Barrister at 5 Essex Court, London, United Kingdom, Mr Andrew Loewenstein, Attorney-at-Law, Foley Hoag LLP, member of the Bar of Massachusetts, Boston, United States of America, Ms Diem Huang Ho, Attorney-at-Law, Foley Hoag LLP, Paris, France, Mr Yuri Parkhomenko, Attorney-at-Law, Foley Hoag LLP, Washington D.C., United States of America, 3 DELIMITATION OF THE MARITIME BOUNDARY BETWEEN MAURITIUS AND MALDIVES Ms Anjolie Singh, Member of the Indian Bar, New Delhi, India, as c;ounsel,· Ms Shiu Ching Young Kim Fat, Minister Counsellor, Prime Minister's Office, as Adviser; Mr Scott Edmonds, International Mapping, Ellicott City, United States of America, Mr Thomas Frogh, International Mapping, Ellicott City, United States of America, as Technical Advisers; Ms Lea Main-Klingst, Germany, as Assistant. The Maldives is represented by: Mr Ibrahim Riffath, Attorney General, as Agent; and Ms Khadeedja Shaheen, Deputy Attorney General, Ms Salwa Habeeb, Senior State Counsel in the Office of the Attorney General, as Representatives,· Mr Payam Akhavan, LL.M., S.J.D. (Harvard), Professor of International Law; Senior Fellow, Massey College and Distinguished Visitor, Faculty of Law, University of Toronto; Member of the State Bar ofNew York and of the Law Society of Ontario; Member of the Permanent Court of Arbitration, Mr Alan Boyle, Emeritus Professor of International Law, University of Edinburgh; Member of the Bar of England and Wales, Essex Court Chambers, United Kingdom, 4 13 October 2020, p.m. Mr Jean-Marc Thouvenin, Professor at the University Paris-Nanterre; Secretary-General of The Hague Academy of International Law; Associate Member of the Institut de droit international; Member of the Paris Bar, Sygna Partners, France, Ms Naomi Hart, Ph.D. (Cambridge); Member of the Bar of England and Wales, Essex Court Chambers, United Kingdom, as Counsel and Advocates; Mr John Brown, Law of the Sea Consultant, Cooley LLP, United Kingdom, as Technical Adviser; Ms Justine Bendel, Ph.D. (Edinburgh), Vienna School oflnternational Studies,Austria, Mr Mitchell Lennan, LL.M., University of Strathclyde, United Kingdom, Ms Melina Antoniadis, LL.M., Barrister and Solicitor, Law Society of Ontario, Canada, as Assistants. 5 DELIMITATION DE LA FRONTIERE MARITIME ENTRE MAURICE ET LES MALDIVES AUDIENCE PUBLIQUE TENUE LE 13 OCTOBRE 2020, 14 H 00 Chambre speciale Presents: M. PAIK, President ; MM. JESUS, PAWLAK, YANAI, BOUGUETAIA, HEIDARjuges; Mme CHADHA,juge; MM. OXMAN, SCHRIJVER,juges ad hoe; Mme HINRICHS OYARCE, Grefjiere. Maurice est representee par : M. Dheerendra Kumar Dabee, G.O.S.K., S.C., Solicitor-General, Bureau de !'Attorney General, comme agent ; M. Jagdish Dharamchand Koonjul, G.O.S.K., ambassadeur et representant permanent de la Republique de Maurice aupres de !'Organisation des Nations Unies, New York (Etats-Unis), comme co-agent ; et M. Philippe Sands QC, professeur de droit international au University College de Londres, avocat au cabinet Matrix Chambers, Londres (Royaume-Uni), M. Paul S. Reichler, avocat, Foley Hoag LLP, membre du barreau du District de Columbia (Etats-Unis), M. Pierre Klein, professeur de droit international a l'Universite libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles (Belgique), comme conseils et avocats ; M. Remi Reichhold, avocat au cabinet 5 Essex Court, Londres (Royaume-Uni), M. Andrew Loewenstein, avocat, Foley Hoag LLP, membre du barreau du Massachusetts, Boston (Etats-Unis), Mme Diem Huang Ho, avocate, Foley Hoag LLP, Paris (France), M. Yuri Parkhomenko, avocat, Foley Hoag LLP, Washington D.C. (Etats-Unis), Mme Anjolie Singh, membre du barreau indien, New Delhi (Inde), 6 13 octobre 2020, apres-midi comme conseils ; Mme Shiu Ching Young Kim Fat, Ministre conseillere, Bureau du Premier ministre, comme conseillere ; M. Scott Edmonds, International Mapping, Ellicott City (Etats-Unis), M. Thomas Frogh, International Mapping, Ellicott City (Etats-Unis), comme conseillers techniques ,· Mme Lea Main-Klingst (Allemagne), comme assistante. Les Maldives soot representees par : M. Ibrahim Riffath, Attorney General, comme agent ; et Mme Khadeedja Shaheen, Attorney General adjointe, Mme Salwa Habeeb, Senior State Counsel au Cabinet de !'Attorney General, comme representantes ; M. Payam Akhavan, LL.M., S.J.D. (Harvard), professeur de droit international ; maitre de recherche au Massey College et professeur invite a la faculte de droit de l'Universite de Toronto; membre du barreau de l'Etat de New York et du barreau de l'Ontario; membre de la Cour permanente d'arbitrage, M. Alan Boyle, professeur emerite de droit international, Universite d'Edimbourg; membre du barreau d'Angleterre et du pays de Galles, cabinet Essex Court Chambers (Royaume-Uni), M. Jean-Marc Thouvenin, professeur a l'Universite Paris-Nanterre ; secretaire general de l' Academie de droit 7 DELIMITATION DE LA FRONTIERE MARITIME ENTRE MAURICE ET LES MALDIVES international de La Haye ; membre associe de l 'Institut de droit international ; membre du barreau de Paris, cabinet Sygna Partners (France), Mme Naomi Hart, doctorat (Cambridge); membre du barreau d' Angleterre et du pays de Galles, cabinet Essex Court Chambers (Royaume-Uni), comme conseils et avocats ,· M. John Brown, consultant en droit de lamer, Cooley LLP (Royaume-Uni), comme conseiller technique ,· Mme Justine Bendel, doctorat (Edimbourg), Ecole de hautes etudes internationales de Vienne (Autriche), M. Mitchell Lennan, LL.M., Universite de Strathclyde (Royaume-Uni), Mme Melina Antoniadis, LL.M., avocate, barreau de !'Ontario (Canada), comme assistants. 8 OPENING OF THE ORAL PROCEEDINGS - 13October 2020 p.m. Opening of the Oral Proceedings [ITLOS/PV.20/C28/1/Rev.1, p. 1--4] THE PRESIDENT OF THE SPECIAL CHAMBER: Good afternoon and welcome. The Special Chamber of the Tribunal formed pursuant to article 15, paragraph 2, of the Statute of the Tribunal meets this afternoon to examine the preliminary objections raised by the Maldives in the Dispute concerning delimitation of the maritime boundary between Mauritius and Maldives in the Indian Ocean. Today's hearing takes place in exceptional circumstances. The past few months have been difficult for all States and the toll of the COVID-19 pandemic has been significant. The work of the Tribunal, like that of many other institutions, has been affected by the pandemic. In light of travel, social distancing and other restrictions put in place by governments worldwide in response to the pandemic, the Tribunal has had to adapt its working methods so as to ensure the continued fulfilment of its mandate. The Tribunal has recently amended its Rules to allow for new ways of working. On 25 September 2020, the Tribunal amended article 74 of its Rules to add a new paragraph which provides that, as an exceptional measure, for public health, security or other compelling reasons the Tribunal may decide to hold a hearing entirely or in part by video link. The Tribunal also amended article 112 of its Rules to add a new paragraph to provide that the reading of the Tribunal's Judgment in a case may take place by video link when necessary for public health, security or other compelling reasons. In view of the COVID-19 pandemic, the Special Chamber has decided that the hearing on the preliminary objections raised by the Maldives will take place in a hybrid format, with a mix of virtual and in-person participation. The following judges are present with me in the courtroom of the Tribunal: Judge Jesus, Judge Yanai, Judge Bouguetaia, Judge Heidar and Judge ad hoe Schrijver. On the other hand, Judge Pawlak, Judge Chadha and Judge ad hoe Oxman are participating in the hearing by video link. Today's hearing is the first in the history of the Tribunal to take place with the participation of some Judges, Agents and Counsel by video link. The sitting of the Special Chamber will be accessible to the public by webstream and any interested person can follow our proceedings today either in the original language from the floor or through the interpretation to the other official language of the Tribunal.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Corrigé Corrected
    Corrigé Corrected CR 2018/20 International Court Cour internationale of Justice de Justice THE HAGUE LA HAYE YEAR 2018 Public sitting held on Monday 3 September 2018, at 10 a.m., at the Peace Palace, President Yusuf presiding, on the Legal Consequences of the Separation of the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius in 1965 (Request for advisory opinion submitted by the General Assembly of the United Nations) ____________________ VERBATIM RECORD ____________________ ANNÉE 2018 Audience publique tenue le lundi 3 septembre 2018, à 10 heures, au Palais de la Paix, sous la présidence de M. Yusuf, président, sur les Effets juridiques de la séparation de l’archipel des Chagos de Maurice en 1965 (Demande d’avis consultatif soumise par l’Assemblée générale des Nations Unies) ________________ COMPTE RENDU ________________ - 2 - Present: President Yusuf Vice-President Xue Judges Tomka Abraham Bennouna Cançado Trindade Donoghue Gaja Sebutinde Bhandari Robinson Gevorgian Salam Iwasawa Registrar Couvreur - 3 - Présents : M. Yusuf, président Mme Xue, vice-présidente MM. Tomka Abraham Bennouna Cançado Trindade Mme Donoghue M. Gaja Mme Sebutinde MM. Bhandari Robinson Gevorgian Salam Iwasawa, juges M. Couvreur, greffier - 4 - The Republic of Mauritius is represented by: H.E. Sir Anerood Jugnauth, G.C.S.K., K.C.M.G., Q.C., Minister Mentor, Minister of Defence, Minister for Rodrigues of the Republic of Mauritius, as Head of Delegation (from 3 to 5 September 2018); Mr. Nayen Koomar Ballah, G.O.S.K., Secretary to Cabinet and Head of the Civil Service, Mr. Dheerendra Kumar Dabee, G.O.S.K., S.C., Solicitor General, H.E. Mr. Jagdish Dharamchand Koonjul, G.O.S.K., Ambassador and Permanent Representative of the Republic of Mauritius to the United Nations in New York, Ms Shiu Ching Young Kim Fat, Minister Counsellor, Prime Minister’s Office, Mr.
    [Show full text]
  • Mauritius Times Epaper 5 March 2021
    66th Year -- No. 3657 Friday, March 5, 2021 www.mauritiustimes.com facebook.com/mauritius.times 18 Pages - ePaper MAURITIUS TIMES l A good leader is a person who takes a little more than his share of the blame and a little less than his share of the credit. - John Maxwell Interview: Rama Sithanen - Economist & Former MOF “The Bérenger-Duval coalition risks transforming an already divided country into a cleaved and a polarised one between two distinct groups competing for political power” * See Pages 7-8-9 Shedding the Dead Sea mentality Need to remain focused There was a time in this country when the focus was not so We owe it to the young and future generations to clear the much on power per se as on what positive changes that appalling mess and trigger the sea change necessary to power could bring about for the betterment of the citizenry establish a significantly better order Dr R Neerunjun Gopee * See Page 3 By Mrinal Roy * See Page 3 By Hanna Zagefka, Vaccine nationalism will block our Professor of Social Psychology, path out of the pandemic - so how Royal Holloway * See Page 2 do we resist our tribal instinct? Mauritius Times Friday, March 5, 2021 www.mauritiustimes.com Edit Page facebook.com/mauritius.times 2 The Political Cauldron: More Muddling The Conversation t is widely known that the leader of the him to establish his credentials as a potential Vaccine nationalism will block our MMM, Paul Berenger, has the knack to com- leader of the LP. Imit political blunders - and that is what has The question now is: What happens next?
    [Show full text]
  • Disputes Over the British Indian Ocean Territory: a Survey RESEARCH PAPER 13/31 22 May 2013
    Disputes over the British Indian Ocean Territory: a survey RESEARCH PAPER 13/31 22 May 2013 Between 1968 and 1973 the British Government cleared the entire Chagos Archipelago of its inhabitants, opening the way for a US military base on the biggest island, Diego Garcia. The Archipelago was made a British overseas territory, the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT). Two main disputes have arisen from these events. One has been between the Chagos Islanders and the British Government over the legality of the former’s removal and whether they have a right to return. The other has been between the UK and Mauritius about sovereignty over the BIOT. The UK has said that it will cede sovereignty to Mauritius once the BIOT is no longer required for defence purposes. Can progress be made towards resolving these disputes? Both have at various points in the past appeared to be all but intractable and several domestic and international legal challenges remain in play. But potential ways forward over the next two years are certainly not beyond the bounds of imagination. The British Government is currently reviewing its policy on resettlement, with supporters of the Chagos Islanders arguing that the outer islands of the Archipelago could be feasible sites for limited resettlement. And while the arrangement with the US over its military use of Diego Garcia looks set to be extended for a further 20 years from 2016, some are asking whether, if the outer islands of the BIOT are not required for defence purposes, they could be ceded to Mauritius as an interim step.
    [Show full text]
  • Mauritius V United Kingdom
    ARBITRATION UNDER ANNEX VII OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA MAURITIUS v. UNITED KINGDOM COUNTER-MEMORIAL SUBMITTTED BY THE UNITED KINGDOM 15 JULY 2013 CONTENTS CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION…………………………………………… 1 A: Summary of proceedings…………………………………………………… 1 B: General observations………………………………………………………..... 3 C: Organisation of the Counter-Memorial……………………………………..... 5 PART ONE: THE FACTS…………………………………………………….. 7 CHAPTER II: GEOGRAPHICAL, CONSTITUTIONAL AND DIPLOMATIC BACKGROUND……………………………………………... 8 A: Geography of the British Indian Ocean Territory and of the Republic of Mauritius………………………………………………………………………… 8 (i) The British Indian Ocean Territory………………………………..… 8 (ii) The Republic of Mauritius……………………………………………. 11 B: The constitutional history of the Chagos Archipelago/ British Indian Ocean Territory………………………………………………………………………..... 11 (i) Cession to the United Kingdom……………………………………… 12 (ii) British administration as a Lesser Dependency (1814-1965)………… 12 (iii) The British Indian Ocean Territory: establishment and constitutional evolution……………………………………………………………... 16 C: The constitutional history of Mauritius……………………………………..... 18 D: The 5 November 1965 agreement by the Mauritius Council of Ministers to 22 the establishment of the BIOT………………………………………………… E: Debate in the UN General Assembly in 1965/1967 and subsequently………. 31 (i) UNGA resolutions 2066(XX), 2232(XXI) and 2357(XXII)………… 31 (ii) Mauritian statements in the UNGA after Independence and UK replies…………………………………………………………………. 34 F: Subsequent relations between Mauritius and the United Kingdom concerning the BIOT………………………………………………………………………… 38 (i) Fishing in the BIOT and the ‘fishing rights’ understanding…….......... 38 (ii) The mineral rights understanding…………………………………….. 45 Figure 2.1: Geographical Setting of BIOT and Mauritius…………………... 48 Figure 2.2: 200 Nautical Mile Zones of BIOT and Mauritius……………….. 49 Figure 2.3: British Indian Ocean Territory: Chagos Archipelago………….. 50 Figure 2.4: Fishing Licences Issued by BIOT from 1991 to 30 March 2010.
    [Show full text]
  • Dimpho Motsamai
    EUROPEAN CENTRE FOR ELECTORAL SUPPORT ESN - SA ELECTORAL SUPPORT NETWORK IN SOUTHERN AFRICA Democratic Republic of Congo United Republic PREVENTING AND of MITIGATINGTanzania ELECTORAL CONFLICTSeychelles Angola AND VIOLENCEMozambique Zambia Malawi Mauritius Madagascar ZimbabweFabio Bargiacchi, Victoria Florinder Editors Namibia Botswana Kondwani Chirambo, Thibaud Kurtz Co-editors Swaziland South Africa Lesotho Funded 75% by The European Union and 25% by The European Centre for Electoral Support Table of Content FOREWORD 2 PREFACE 7 INTRODUCTION 10 CHAPTER I - ELECTORAL CONFLICT PREVENTION FRAMEWORK 16 Handbook Purpose and Goal 17 Defining Election Related Conflict and Research Framework 19 A Regional Journey About Preventing Electoral Violence 19 Early Warning 28 CHAPTER II - CASE STUDIES 30 Regional SADC and Botswana / Kondwani Chirambo 31 Angola / Celestino Onesimo Setucula 61 Democratic Republic of the Congo / Robert Gerenge 76 Lesotho / Victor Shale 101 Madagascar / Juvence Ramasy 128 Malawi / Henry Chingaipe 148 Mauritius / Catherine Boudet 180 Mozambique / Johanna Nilsson 205 Namibia / Maximilian Weiland 230 South Africa / Dimpho Motsamai 255 Swaziland / Lungile Mnisi 278 United Republic of Tanzania and Zanzibar / Andrew Mushi and Alexander Makulilo 303 Zambia / Lee Habasonda 326 Zimbabwe / Jestina Mukoko 350 CHAPTER III - CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION 378 Key Findings for the Region 379 Shared Regional Issues from the Case Studies 379 Regional Issues 382 Unique National Issues with Potential for Regional Focus 382 Conclusions 384
    [Show full text]
  • Investing in Mauritius
    FT SPECIAL REPORT Investing in Mauritius Wednesday September 23 2015 www.ft.com/reports | @ftreports message he campaigned on as he led his Mouvement Socialiste Militant (MSM) Inside party back to power — as part of L’Alli- anceLepep,atieupwithtwootherpolit- Uncertainty lingers in Nation needs ical parties — after nearly a decade of rule by his rival, Navinchandra Ram- wake of scandals goolam,leaderoftheLabourparty. Government ‘clean-up’ Thepledgestotacklecorruptionwere policy has been generally welcomed. And with gross criticised by some to reignite domestic product growth averaging about 3 per cent in the past nine years, Page 2 there was a palpable sense that a fresh directionwasneeded. Ambitions to become a A report on Mauritius by the World regional entrepôt the engine Bank published in June describes the country as being at a “crossroads”, say- As Europe stagnates ing the government faces “mounting Mauritius looks to Africa socialandeconomicchallengesthatwill Page 3 make it more difficult to achieve high- of growth incomestatusinthemediumterm”. Offshore ambitions InhisAugustspeech,SirAneroodout- lined his government’s plans to target The country is trying to average annual growth of 5.5 per cent raise its profile as a A lacklustre economy and corruption scandals from 2017 and to raise per capita financial centre income, which was about $9,000 in Page 3 dominate the agenda, reports Andrew England 2013,tomorethan$13,500by2018.The plans include revamping manufactur- ing, developing a so-called ocean econ- First Muslim female t was no coincidence that Sir Aner- But as the country of 1.26m looks omy focused on marine activities, ood Jugnauth, Mauritius’s prime aheadtoitsnextstageofdevelopment— expanding the financial services sector head of state minister,chose a conference centre with Sir Anerood targeting a “second andsupporting“smartcities”.
    [Show full text]
  • Sir Anerood Jugnauth Le ‘Mentor’ De Toute Une Nation Les Grands Titres
    Décès de SAJ : Les Décès de Sir Anerood drapeaux en berne Jugnauth : L’Inde annonce jusqu’aux funérailles un deuil national Edition 184 – Edition Spéciale Weekend www.ionnews.mu 05 – 06 juin 2021 Sir Anerood Jugnauth Le ‘mentor’ de toute une nation Les grands titres 4 SAJ, le ‘mentor’ de toute une nation 6 SAJ, le père de l’ile Maurice d’aujourd’hui n’est plus Funérailles de Sir Anerood Jugnauth, ce samedi 5 11 juin : L’itinéraire du convoi mortuaire de La Caverne à Pamplemousses Décès de SAJ : Les drapeaux en berne jusqu’aux 12 funérailles Réunion spéciale du Cabinet : A l’agenda, les 13 dispositions prises pour les funérailles de SAJ Décès de SAJ : Préparatifs au Jardin de 14 Pamplemousses pour la crémation Dr Padayachy : « Se devlopman ki SAJ inn amene 15 dan pei ki finn permet mo fami avoy mwa fer letud » Dr Kailesh Jagutpal : « Pour nous, jeunes 16 politiciens, une référence à suivre » Vikram Hurdoyal : « Nous avons perdu un grand 17 homme d’Etat » Kavydass Ramano : « C’était un grand tribun et 18 nous l’avons perdu » [Moments forts de SAJ] Joe Lesjongard : « Les 19 élections de 1995 et les Chagos » Naveena Ramyad : « Les jeunes sont capables de 20 rêver aujourd’hui grâce à SAJ » Sheila Bappoo : « C’était un homme qui prenait des 21 décisions fermes » Xavier-Luc Duval : « Sir Anerood a marqué 22 l’histoire de notre pays » Arvin Boolell : « SAJ, un grand homme attaché à la 23 simplicité » Khushal Lobine : « C’est une grande perte pour la 24 circonscription No 15 » 2 Ashit Gungah : « Son parcours politique demeure 25 exemplaire » Ravi Rutnah : « Il m’a dit qu’il fallait toujours faire 26 de la politique avec honnêteté » [Vidéo] Rajesh Bhagwan, Aadil Ameer Meea et 27 Joanna Bérenger rendent hommage à SAJ Bissoon Mungroo : « C’est comme si j’ai perdu mon 28 père.
    [Show full text]
  • Rethinking Rhetoric: an Investigation of Political Persuasion Online. a Case Study of Mauritian Electoral Interviews Livestreamed on Facebook
    Rethinking Rhetoric: An investigation of political persuasion online. A case study of Mauritian electoral interviews livestreamed on Facebook. Kelvin Suddason SDDKEL001 A minor dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the award of the degree of Master of Arts in Global Media Studies Faculty of the Humanities University of Cape Town 2019 COMPULSORY DECLARATIONUniversity of Cape Town This work has not been previously submitted in whole, or in part, for the award of any degree. It is my own work. Each significant contribution to, and quotation in, this dissertation from the work, or works, of other people has been attributed, and has been cited and referenced. Signature: Date: 14 October 2019 The copyright of this thesis vests in the author. No quotation from it or information derivedTown from it is to be published without full acknowledgement of the source. The thesis is to be used for private study or non- commercial research purposes only. Cape Published by the University of Cape Town (UCT) in terms of the non-exclusive license granted to UCT by the author. University ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This research project would not have been possible without the guidance of my supervisor, Associate Professor Musawenkosi Ndlovu. I am incredibly grateful to my family for their unwavering support. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acronyms & Abbreviations .................................................................................................... 4 List of Figures ..........................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Conceptual Framework and Methodology
    Translation and National Identity: The Use and Reception of Mauritian Creole Translations of Shakespeare and Molière Kate November PhD University of Edinburgh 2009 Declaration I, Kate November, declare that this thesis is my own work and that it has not been submitted for any other degree or professional qualification. Signature: Date: To Jesus, my Lord and Saviour Abstract The purpose of this thesis is to find out whether theatre translation into Mauritian Creole can contribute to the formation of a national identity in post-colonial, multi-ethnic and multilingual Mauritius. There are currently fourteen languages spoken, many of which, as carriers of symbolic value, are often used as markers of ethnic identity. Moreover, the fact that they do not all carry the same socio-economic and political status has created a linguistic hierarchy which positions English at the top, closely followed by French, in turn followed by Asian languages and finally by Mauritian Creole, even though the latter is the most widely spoken language on the island. I argue that translation into Mauritian Creole is largely an ideological endeavour, designed to challenge the existing asymmetrical linguistic power relations, and to highlight the language’s existence as a shared cultural capital and as a potential force for national unity. I show how such an endeavour is closely linked to the political and socio-cultural aspects of the target society. This is done by using complementary theoretical perspectives, such as Itamar Even-Zohar’s polysystem theory (1979, 2000), André Lefevere’s systemic concept (2004) and post-colonial approaches to translation, and by drawing upon the case study research method, with its emphasis on multiple sources for data collection.
    [Show full text]
  • Award in the Arbitration Regarding the Chagos Marine Protected Area
    REPORTS OF INTERNATIONAL ARBITRAL AWARDS RECUEIL DES SENTENCES ARBITRAL Award in the Arbitration regarding the Chagos Marine Protected Area between Mauritius and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland -- Sentence arbitrale relative au différend entre Maurice et le Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d’Irlande du Nord concernant l’aire marine protégée des Chagos 18 March 2015 - 18 mars 2015 VOLUME XXXI pp. 359-606 NATIONS UNIES - UNITED NATIONS Copyright (c) 2018 PART II Award in the Arbitration regarding the Chagos Marine Protected Area between Mauritius and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Award of 18 March 2015 PARTIE II Sentence arbitrale relative au différend entre Maurice et le Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d’Irlande du Nord concernant l’aire marine protégée des Chagos Sentence du 18 mars 2015 Award in the Arbitration regarding the Chagos Marine Protected Area between Mauritius and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Sentence arbitrale relative au différend entre Maurice et le Royaume-Uni de Grande-Bretagne et d’Irlande du Nord concernant l’aire marine protégée des Chagos Jurisdiction over First Submission—Part XV, Articles 286 and 288 of United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (“UNCLOS”)—challenge to UK declaration of marine protected area (“MPA”) in parts of Chagos Archipelago, as UK not “coastal state” as defined by UNCLOS—dispute properly characterized as relat- ing to territorial sovereignty over Chagos Archipelago—Article 298(a)(i) of UNCLOS indicates drafters’ sensitivity to compulsory settlement of disputes for delimitation of maritime boundaries—question of sovereignty over land central to the dispute, not ancillary—Tribunal without jurisdiction to address sovereignty dispute, no jurisdic- tion over First Submission.
    [Show full text]
  • Debate No 05 of 2013
    1 No. 05 of 2013 FIFTH NATIONAL ASSEMBLY PARLIAMENTARY DEBATES (HANSARD) SECOND SESSION TUESDAY 23 APRIL 2013 2 CONTENTS ANNOUNCEMENT PAPERS LAID QUESTIONS (Oral) MOTION BILLS (Public) ADJOURNMENT QUESTIONS (Written) 3 Members Members THE CABINET (Formed by Dr. the Hon. Navinchandra Ramgoolam) Dr. the Hon. Navinchandra Ramgoolam, GCSK, FRCP Prime Minister, Minister of Defence, Home Affairs and External Communications, Minister for Rodrigues Dr. the Hon. Ahmed Rashid Beebeejaun, GCSK, FRCP Deputy Prime Minister, Minister of Energy and Public Utilities Hon. Charles Gaëtan Xavier-Luc Duval, GCSK Vice-Prime Minister, Minister of Finance and Economic Development Hon. Anil Kumar Bachoo, GOSK Vice-Prime Minister, Minister of Public Infrastructure, National Development Unit, Land Transport and Shipping Dr. the Hon. Arvin Boolell, GOSK Minister of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade Dr. the Hon. Abu Twalib Kasenally, GOSK, FRCS Minister of Housing and Lands Hon. Mrs Sheilabai Bappoo, GOSK Minister of Social Security, National Solidarity and Reform Institutions Dr. the Hon. Vasant Kumar Bunwaree Minister of Education and Human Resources Hon. Satya Veyash Faugoo Minister of Agro-Industry and Food Security Hon. Devanand Virahsawmy, GOSK Minister of Environment and Sustainable Development Dr. the Hon. Rajeshwar Jeetah Minister of Tertiary Education, Science, Research and Technology Hon. Tassarajen Pillay Chedumbrum Minister of Information and Communication Technology Hon. Louis Joseph Von-Mally, GOSK Minister of Fisheries Hon. Satyaprakash Ritoo Minister of Youth and Sports Hon. Louis Hervé Aimée Minister of Local Government and Outer Islands Hon. Mookhesswur Choonee Minister of Arts and Culture Hon. Shakeel Ahmed Yousuf Abdul Razack Mohamed Minister of Labour, Industrial Relations and Employment Hon.
    [Show full text]
  • Mauritius V United Kingdom
    ARBITRATION UNDER ANNEX VII OF THE UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA MAURITIUS v. UNITED KINGDOM REJOINDER SUBMITTTED BY THE UNITED KINGDOM 17 MARCH 2014 CONTENTS CHAPTER I: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................... 1 A: Preliminary observations ............................................................................... 1 B: Organisation of the Rejoinder ............................................................................... 5 PART ONE: THE FACTS ........................................................................................... 9 CHAPTER II: CONSTITUTIONAL AND DIPLOMATIC BACKGROUND ..................................................................... 10 A: Introduction ......................................................................................................... 10 B: The islands that now form the BIOT were never part of the territory of Mauritius ............................................................ 11 (i) Constitutional, legislative and administrative arrangements ................................................................................. 12 (ii) Economic, social and cultural links ........................................................................ 15 (iii) United Kingdom actions before the establishment of the BIOT ............................................................................. 16 (iv) Mauritius asserts ‘recognition’ by ‘the international community’ of the Chagos Archipelago as part of its territory ..................................................................
    [Show full text]