DOCSLIB.ORG

REPUBLIC of MAURITIUS V. UNITED KINGDOM OF

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
REPUBLIC of MAURITIUS V. UNITED KINGDOM OF ARBITRATION UNDER ANNEX VII OF THE 1982 UNITED NATIONS CONVENTION ON THE LAW OF THE SEA REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS v. UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND NORTHERN IRELAND REPLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF MAURITIUS VOLUME I 18 November 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER 1:! INTRODUCTION .....................................................................................1! (a)! The UK’s argument on self-determination ......................................................2! (b)! Documents disclosed by the UK in the English judicial review proceedings ..................................................................................................2! (c)! UK silences ......................................................................................................5! (d)! The nature and purpose of the “MPA” ............................................................6! (e)! Recognition of Mauritius’ Rights ....................................................................7! I.! The Structure of the Reply ............................................................................................8! (a)! The Factual Chapters of the Reply ..................................................................8! (b)! The Legal Chapters of the Reply .....................................................................9! CHAPTER 2:! HISTORICAL AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND ..............................13! I.! Introduction .................................................................................................................13! II.! The Chagos Archipelago has always been an integral part of the territory of Mauritius ................................................................................................................14! (a)! Constitutional, legislative and administrative arrangements .........................16! (b)! Economic, cultural and social links ...............................................................20! (c)! Before the detachment of the Chagos Archipelago, the UK acted in a manner that implied recognition of the Chagos Archipelago as an integral part of Mauritius. ..........................................................................22! (d)! The international community recognised the Chagos Archipelago as part of the territory of Mauritius ................................................................23! III.! Independence was conditioned on Ministers’ Agreement to the Detachment of the Chagos Archipelago .....................................................................................24! (a)! The road to independence ..............................................................................26! (b)! Independence was granted on condition that Mauritian Ministers agreed to the excision of the Chagos Archipelago .....................................28! (c) The evidence relied on by the UK ....................................................................34! IV.! Reaction at the UN and Subsequent Protest By Mauritius .......................................38! V.! The United Kingdom’s undertakings with regard to fishing, mineral and oil rights ......................................................................................................................49! (a)! Fishing rights .................................................................................................50! (b)! Mineral and oil rights ....................................................................................62! VI.! Conclusion ................................................................................................................64! CHAPTER 3:! CREATION OF THE “MARINE PROTECTED AREA” ..................67! I.! Introduction .................................................................................................................67! II.! UK and international environmental policy ...............................................................67! III.! The creation of the “MPA” ......................................................................................68! (a)! 1996 and 2004 analyses of Mauritius’ rights over the Chagos Archipelago ................................................................................................68! (b)! The approach by Pew in 2007/2008 ..............................................................69! (c)! The 2009 bilateral talks .................................................................................71! (d)! Further developments in 2009 .......................................................................82! (e)! The process leading to the announcement of the “MPA” .............................83! (f)! The nature and purpose of the “MPA” ..........................................................90! (g)! Internal recognition of Mauritian rights following the announcement of the “MPA” .............................................................................................92! CHAPTER 4:! THE EXCHANGES OF THE PARTIES, AND ARTICLE 283(1)…………………………………………………………………………………….95! I.! Introduction .................................................................................................................95! II.! The Dispute and Exchange of Views Over Entitlement as a Coastal State To Declare Maritime Zones ........................................................................................96! III.! The Dispute and Exchange of Views Over the Compatibility of the “MPA” with the Convention and the Rights of Mauritius ..................................................99! (a)! Communications between 2005 and 2008 .....................................................99! (b)! The 2009 bilateral talks ...............................................................................101! (c)! Events in 2009 following the bilateral talks ................................................105! (d)! The meeting between the Prime Ministers of Mauritius and the UK on 27 November 2009 ..............................................................................107! (e)! Exchanges during the remainder of 2009 ....................................................108! (f)! Exchanges in 2010 up to the announcement of the “MPA” ........................109! (g)! Mauritius’ reaction to the announcement of the “MPA” ............................110! IV.! The Requirements of Article 283(1) .......................................................................113! V.! Conclusions ..............................................................................................................118! CHAPTER 5:! THE UK IS NOT A COASTAL STATE ENTITLED TO DECLARE THE “MPA”…….. .........................................................................................................119! I.! Self-determination .....................................................................................................119! (a)! The right to self-determination was clearly established ..............................120! (b)! The UK was not able to be a “persistent objector” in relation to the establishment of the right .........................................................................123! (c)! The UK did not in any event consistently object to the development of the right ................................................................................................124! (d)! The territorial integrity of non-self-governing territories is an essential aspect of the right of self-determination, to be waived only by the freely expressed wish of the people ......................................127! II.! The detachment of the Chagos Archipelago contravened the right of the people of Mauritius to self-determination ............................................................130! (a)! The Chagos Archipelago has always been part of the territory of Mauritius ..................................................................................................130! - ii - (b)! The people of Mauritius did not waive their right to territorial integrity by a free expression of their wishes ..........................................130! (c)! The international community condemned the UK”s action ........................133! (d)! Protests by Mauritius ...................................................................................135! (e)! The principle of uti possidetis does not give a colonial power the right to dismember a dependent territory before independence ...............136! III.! Mauritius is entitled to the rights of a coastal State based on the undertakings of the United Kingdom ...................................................................136! IV.! Conclusion ..............................................................................................................137! V.! Appendix I to Chapter 5 ...........................................................................................138! VI.! Appendix II to Chapter 5 ........................................................................................139! VII.! Appendix III to Chapter 5 .....................................................................................143! VIII.! Appendix IV to Chapter 5 ....................................................................................149! CHAPTER 6:! THE “MPA” VIOLATES THE RIGHTS OF MAURITIUS UNDER THE CONVENTION ....................................................................................................151! I.! Violations not argued to be excluded by Article 297 ................................................151! (a)! Part II of the Convention .............................................................................151!
Load more

Recommended publications
  • This Keyword List Contains Indian Ocean Place Names of Coral Reefs, Islands, Bays and Other Geographic Features in a Hierarchical Structure
    CoRIS Place Keyword Thesaurus by Ocean - 8/9/2016 Indian Ocean This keyword list contains Indian Ocean place names of coral reefs, islands, bays and other geographic features in a hierarchical structure. For example, the first name on the list - Bird Islet - is part of the Addu Atoll, which is in the Indian Ocean. The leading label - OCEAN BASIN - indicates this list is organized according to ocean, sea, and geographic names rather than country place names. The list is sorted alphabetically. The same names are available from “Place Keywords by Country/Territory - Indian Ocean” but sorted by country and territory name. Each place name is followed by a unique identifier enclosed in parentheses. The identifier is made up of the latitude and longitude in whole degrees of the place location, followed by a four digit number. The number is used to uniquely identify multiple places that are located at the same latitude and longitude. For example, the first place name “Bird Islet” has a unique identifier of “00S073E0013”. From that we see that Bird Islet is located at 00 degrees south (S) and 073 degrees east (E). It is place number 0013 at that latitude and longitude. (Note: some long lines wrapped, placing the unique identifier on the following line.) This is a reformatted version of a list that was obtained from ReefBase. OCEAN BASIN > Indian Ocean OCEAN BASIN > Indian Ocean > Addu Atoll > Bird Islet (00S073E0013) OCEAN BASIN > Indian Ocean > Addu Atoll > Bushy Islet (00S073E0014) OCEAN BASIN > Indian Ocean > Addu Atoll > Fedu Island (00S073E0008)
    [Show full text]
  • 'British Small Craft': the Cultural Geographies of Mid-Twentieth
    ‘British Small Craft’: the cultural geographies of mid-twentieth century technology and display James Lyon Fenner BA MA Thesis submitted to the University of Nottingham for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy August 2014 Abstract The British Small Craft display, installed in 1963 as part of the Science Museum’s new Sailing Ships Gallery, comprised of a sequence of twenty showcases containing models of British boats—including fishing boats such as luggers, coracles, and cobles— arranged primarily by geographical region. The brainchild of the Keeper William Thomas O’Dea, the nautical themed gallery was complete with an ocean liner deck and bridge mezzanine central display area. It contained marine engines and navigational equipment in addition to the numerous varieties of international historical ship and boat models. Many of the British Small Craft displays included accessory models and landscape settings, with human figures and painted backdrops. The majority of the models were acquired by the museum during the interwar period, with staff actively pursuing model makers and local experts on information, plans and the miniature recreation of numerous regional boat types. Under the curatorship supervision of Geoffrey Swinford Laird Clowes this culminated in the temporary ‘British Fishing Boats’ Exhibition in the summer of 1936. However the earliest models dated back even further with several originating from the Victorian South Kensington Museum collections, appearing in the International Fisheries Exhibition of 1883. 1 With the closure and removal of the Shipping Gallery in late 2012, the aim of this project is to produce a reflective historical and cultural geographical account of these British Small Craft displays held within the Science Museum.
    [Show full text]
  • BARBADOS Latin America & Caribbean
    Country Profile BARBADOS Abc Region: Latin America & Caribbean 2020 EPI Country Rank (out of 180) GDP [PPP 2011$ billions] 4.7 77 GDP per capita [$] 16,464 2020 EPI Score [0=worst, 100=best] Population [millions] 0.3 45.6 Urbanization [%] 31.19 Country Scorecard Issue Categories Rank [/180] Environmental Health 38 60.7 Air Quality 32 66.0 Sanitation & Drinking Water 78 51.9 Heavy Metals 39 70.4 Waste Management 50 67.2 Ecosystem Vitality 145 35.6 Biodiversity & Habitat 177 12.6 Ecosystem Services 75 37.1 Fisheries 28 18.4 Climate Change 58 59.1 Pollution Emissions 102 53.3 Agriculture 170 11.9 Water Resources 104 1.1 Regional Average World Average epi.yale.edu Page 1 of 3 Country Profile BARBADOS Abc Region: Latin America & Caribbean 10-Year Regional Regional Rank EPI Score Change Rank Average Environmental Performance Index 77 45.6 +0.9 18 45.6 Environmental Health 38 60.7 +0.9 3 46.8 Air Quality 32 66 +1.3 2 46.9 Household solid fuels 28 96.5 +5.3 1 48.0 PM 2.5 exposure 90 40.7 -1.6 21 44.3 Ozone exposure 1 100 –- 1 65.7 Sanitation & Drinking Water 78 51.9 –- 9 47.0 Unsafe sanitation 71 58.3 +1.3 8 52.0 Unsafe drinking water 76 47.6 -0.8 9 43.6 Heavy Metals / Lead exposure 39 70.4 +3.6 4 50.8 Waste Management / Controlled solid waste 50 67.2 –- 7 42.2 Ecosystem Vitality 145 35.6 +1.0 30 44.7 Biodiversity & Habitat 177 12.6 +1.2 32 58.4 Terrestrial biomes (nat'l) 174 2.8 –- 32 73.3 Terrestrial biomes (global) 174 2.8 –- 32 71.4 Marine protected areas 113 0.1 –- 28 31.7 Protected Areas Representativeness Index 34 50.4 +10.9 20 52.4 Species
    [Show full text]
  • Title Items-In-Visits of Heads of States and Foreign Ministers
    UN Secretariat Item Scan - Barcode - Record Title Page Date 15/06/2006 Time 4:59:15PM S-0907-0001 -01 -00001 Expanded Number S-0907-0001 -01 -00001 Title items-in-Visits of heads of states and foreign ministers Date Created 17/03/1977 Record Type Archival Item Container s-0907-0001: Correspondence with heads-of-state 1965-1981 Print Name of Person Submit Image Signature of Person Submit •3 felt^ri ly^f i ent of Public Information ^ & & <3 fciiW^ § ^ %•:£ « Pres™ s Sectio^ n United Nations, New York Note Ko. <3248/Rev.3 25 September 1981 KOTE TO CORRESPONDENTS HEADS OF STATE OR GOVERNMENT AND MINISTERS TO ATTEND GENERAL ASSEMBLY SESSION The Secretariat has been officially informed so far that the Heads of State or Government of 12 countries, 10 Deputy Prime Ministers or Vice- Presidents, 124 Ministers for Foreign Affairs and five other Ministers will be present during the thirty-sixth regular session of the General Assembly. Changes, deletions and additions will be available in subsequent revisions of this release. Heads of State or Government George C, Price, Prime Minister of Belize Mary E. Charles, Prime Minister and Minister for Finance and External Affairs of Dominica Jose Napoleon Duarte, President of El Salvador Ptolemy A. Reid, Prime Minister of Guyana Daniel T. arap fcoi, President of Kenya Mcussa Traore, President of Mali Eeewcosagur Ramgoolare, Prime Minister of Haur itius Seyni Kountche, President of the Higer Aristides Royo, President of Panama Prem Tinsulancnda, Prime Minister of Thailand Walter Hadye Lini, Prime Minister and Kinister for Foreign Affairs of Vanuatu Luis Herrera Campins, President of Venezuela (more) For information media — not an official record Office of Public Information Press Section United Nations, New York Note Ho.
    [Show full text]
  • Family History Mauritius Twocol
    Our Ancestors from Mauritius Paul Francis, 2010 This is the story of our ancestors who came from Mauritius. 1 Early Days Mauritius had been uninhabited prior to The story of our Mauritian ancestors the arrival of the first European settlers. th starts on the 9 of April 1729. After a Its dense forests had been roamed by five month journey from St Malo in dodos, their close relation the solitaire, France, the wooden sailing ship “Royal and by tortoises so large that eight Philip” was at last about to arrive in people could stand on the back of one. Mauritius (then known as the Ile de All these had, however, been wiped out France). On board were the first 30 by the Dutch, who had established a volunteer French settlers, on their way number of abortive colonies on the to new lives in the new colony. And island during the seventeenth century, amongst them was Jean Toussaint Jocet before abandoning the island in 1710. de la Porte, his wife Jeanne Thérèse They had left behind feral monkeys and Thomas, and their two young children, rats. Without natural predators, the rats aged three and five. had overrun the island and grown to the size of rabbits. The colony on Ile de France was only Native Forests of Mauritius. eight years old. It was a private sector colony – established by the French East In 1729, when Jean and Jeanne arrived, India Company to act as a base for their the colony had about 100 French settlers trading ships in the Indian Ocean.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report
    Darwin Initiative Annual Report Important note: To be completed with reference to the Reporting Guidance Notes for Project Leaders: it is expected that this report will be about 10 pages in length, excluding annexes Submission Deadline: 30 April Project Reference 19-027 Project Title Strengthening the world’s largest Marine Protected Area: Chagos Archipelago Host Country/ies British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT) Contract Holder Institution Bangor University Partner institutions University of Warwick, Zoological Society of London, FCO BIOT Administration Darwin Grant Value £287,788 Start/end dates of project 2012/13 – 2014/15 Reporting period (eg Apr 2013 2013-2014: Annual Report 2 – Mar 2014) and number (eg Annual Report 1, 2, 3) Project Leader name Dr John R Turner Project website Chagos Environment Outreach Project: http://www.zsl.org/conservation/regions/africa/chagos- coral/chagos-community,1915,AR.html http://www.zsl.org/regions/uk-and-overseas-territories/chagos- archipelago Scientific Expedition 2014: http://chagos-trust.org/2014-biot- expedition Report author(s) and date Dr John Turner, Prof Charles Sheppard, Dr Heather Koldewey, Rebecca Short and Audrey Blancart contributed to report and/or annexes. June 2014. Project Goal: To strengthen the Chagos Marine Protected Area by providing scientific knowledge for effective management, and develop a strategy that engages the support of potential stakeholders through outreach, education and engagement. The legacy will be sound management and increased value of what is currently the world’s largest no-take Marine Protected Area and a unique and globally important reference site. Location: The Chagos archipelago is situated in the middle of the Indian Ocean at the southernmost end of the Laccadive-Chagos ridge.
    [Show full text]
  • UK and Colonies
    This document was archived on 27 July 2017 UK and Colonies 1. General 1.1 Before 1 January 1949, the principal form of nationality was British subject status, which was obtained by virtue of a connection with a place within the Crown's dominions. On and after this date, the main form of nationality was citizenship of the UK and Colonies, which was obtained by virtue of a connection with a place within the UK and Colonies. 2. Meaning of the expression 2.1 On 1 January 1949, all the territories within the Crown's dominions came within the UK and Colonies except for the Dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Newfoundland, India, Pakistan and Ceylon (see "DOMINIONS") and Southern Rhodesia, which were identified by s.1(3) of the BNA 1948 as independent Commonwealth countries. Section 32(1) of the 1948 Act defined "colony" as excluding any such country. Also excluded from the UK and Colonies was Southern Ireland, although it was not an independent Commonwealth country. 2.2 For the purposes of the BNA 1948, the UK included Northern Ireland and, as of 10 February 1972, the Island of Rockall, but excluded the Channel Islands and Isle of Man which, under s.32(1), were colonies. 2.3 The significance of a territory which came within the UK and Colonies was, of course, that by virtue of a connection with such a territory a person could become a CUKC. Persons who, prior to 1 January 1949, had become British subjects by birth, naturalisation, annexation or descent as a result of a connection with a territory which, on that date, came within the UK and Colonies were automatically re- classified as CUKCs (s.12(1)-(2)).
    [Show full text]
  • Coral Bleaching Impacts from Back-To-Back 2015–2016 Thermal Anomalies in the Remote Central Indian Ocean
    Coral Reefs (2019) 38:605–618 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00338-019-01821-9 REPORT Coral bleaching impacts from back-to-back 2015–2016 thermal anomalies in the remote central Indian Ocean 1,2,5 3,4,5 1 Catherine E. I. Head • Daniel T. I. Bayley • Gwilym Rowlands • 6 7 1 5 Ronan C. Roche • David M. Tickler • Alex D. Rogers • Heather Koldewey • 6 1,8 John R. Turner • Dominic A. Andradi-Brown Received: 28 September 2018 / Accepted: 20 May 2019 / Published online: 12 July 2019 Ó The Author(s) 2019 Abstract Studying scleractinian coral bleaching and becoming the dominant coral genus post-bleaching because recovery dynamics in remote, isolated reef systems offers of an 86% decline in Acropora from 14 to 2% cover. an opportunity to examine impacts of global reef stressors Spatial heterogeneity in Acropora mortality across the in the absence of local human threats. Reefs in the Chagos Archipelago was significantly negatively correlated with Archipelago, central Indian Ocean, suffered severe variation in DHWs and with chlorophyll-a concentrations. bleaching and mortality in 2015 following a 7.5 maximum In 2016, a 17.6 maximum DHWs thermal anomaly caused degree heating weeks (DHWs) thermal anomaly, causing a further damage, with 68% of remaining corals bleaching in 60% coral cover decrease from 30% cover in 2012 to 12% May 2016, and coral cover further declining by 29% at in April 2016. Mortality was taxon specific, with Porites Peros Banhos Atoll (northern Chagos Archipelago) from 14% in March 2016 to 10% in April 2017. We therefore document back-to-back coral bleaching and mortality Topic Editor: Morgan S.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Alejandro Anganuzzi Executive Secretary Indian Ocean Tuna Commission Mahe Seychelles 20 January 2010
    18 Queen Street Tel: (+ 44) 020 7255 7755 London Fax: (+ 44) 020 7499 5388 W1J 5PN E-Mail: [email protected] United Kingdom Internet: www.mrag.co.uk Alejandro Anganuzzi Executive Secretary Indian Ocean Tuna Commission Mahe Seychelles 20 January 2010 Dear Dr Anganuzzi, Resolution 09/03. On establishing a list of vessels presumed to have carried out illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing in the IOTC area. On behalf of the British Indian Ocean Territory Administration as required under resolution 09/03 please find attached details of five vessels flagged to Sri Lanka carrying out IUU fishing activities in the IOTC Area, specifically within the BIOT Fisheries Conservation Management Zone during 2009. The Sri Lankan Authorities have been notified of this action. All vessel owners have paid their fines and the vessels have been released. We would be grateful if you could bring these details to the attention of the Compliance Committee for inclusion on the IUU list. Whilst none of the vessels had tuna onboard there were a large number of sharks and the vessels all used longline gear, associated with targeting tuna. This further highlights the continuing problem of IUU activity by vessels flagged to Sri Lanka, despite this issue having been raised at a number of levels in the past. Yours sincerely Dr C. C. Mees Head of UK Delegation to IOTC Marine Resources Assessment Group MRAG Ltd In association with Registered Company no. 291 2982 Marine Education and Conservation Trust VAT Registration No 877 7013 92 Reg. Charity No. 297 193 IOTC Reporting Form For Illegal Activity Recalling IOTC Resolution 2009/03 ³2Q Hstablishing a list of vessels presumed to have carried out illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing in the IOTC area´ attached are details of illegal activity recorded in the British Indian Ocean Territory.
    [Show full text]
  • Biodiversity: the UK Overseas Territories. Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee
    Biodiversity: the UK Overseas Territories Compiled by S. Oldfield Edited by D. Procter and L.V. Fleming ISBN: 1 86107 502 2 © Copyright Joint Nature Conservation Committee 1999 Illustrations and layout by Barry Larking Cover design Tracey Weeks Printed by CLE Citation. Procter, D., & Fleming, L.V., eds. 1999. Biodiversity: the UK Overseas Territories. Peterborough, Joint Nature Conservation Committee. Disclaimer: reference to legislation and convention texts in this document are correct to the best of our knowledge but must not be taken to infer definitive legal obligation. Cover photographs Front cover: Top right: Southern rockhopper penguin Eudyptes chrysocome chrysocome (Richard White/JNCC). The world’s largest concentrations of southern rockhopper penguin are found on the Falkland Islands. Centre left: Down Rope, Pitcairn Island, South Pacific (Deborah Procter/JNCC). The introduced rat population of Pitcairn Island has successfully been eradicated in a programme funded by the UK Government. Centre right: Male Anegada rock iguana Cyclura pinguis (Glen Gerber/FFI). The Anegada rock iguana has been the subject of a successful breeding and re-introduction programme funded by FCO and FFI in collaboration with the National Parks Trust of the British Virgin Islands. Back cover: Black-browed albatross Diomedea melanophris (Richard White/JNCC). Of the global breeding population of black-browed albatross, 80 % is found on the Falkland Islands and 10% on South Georgia. Background image on front and back cover: Shoal of fish (Charles Sheppard/Warwick
    [Show full text]
  • A Rock, an Island: Exploring the Independence of African Island
    A Rock, an Island: Exploring the independence of African Island Nations in the Indian Ocean By Alexander Rijpma Student Number: s1501143 E-mail: [email protected] Word Count: 13,848 s1501143 Introduction: A vast majority of African countries gained their independence in the 1950’s and early 1960’s, with over 30 countries gaining independence in quick succession in the six year period between 1956 and 1962 alone (Boddy-Evans, 2018). The year 1960 in particular was a significant landmark in the history of decolonisation as, in that year alone, 17 African countries gained independence (Talton, 2011). However, in the vast literature that exists detailing this period of decolonisation, very little is written about the African island nations of Mauritius and The Seychelles. These two nations lie very close together in the Indian Ocean, east of the African mainland, and have similar sizes and population densities, not to mention cultural similarities in their customs, language and ethnic makeup. Despite the fact that these countries are both included in the African Union, they are rarely treated in literature regarding African independence as being part of the decolonisation process at all. This is not, in itself, that surprising given that there is generally little academic literature to be found on states on the periphery like these, and this is particularly true for states on the periphery of the African continent. That being said, it is important that we attempt to curb this (lack of) practice by shifting our attention (and our research) to countries like the Seychelles and Mauritius, that exist largely in the periphery.
    [Show full text]