Peace & Justice Center of Eastern Maine

Subject: Diego Garcia

To: Chagos Support Group

Hello Friends of the Chagos people,

A long overdue note of thanks and a status report:

As you may recall and have read, though the coverage in the states has been sparse, the case of the injustice dealt the Chagossians, the people of Diego Garcia, before the House of Lords in London recently.  The British government was filing its final appeal of the court decisions that have three times given these displaced people the right to return to the outer islands of the Chagos Archipelago.

Twenty-eight Chagossians, including several of the survivors of the actual displacement in the late ’60’s and early ’70’s were able to make the trip from Mauritius, where they presently reside, to London.  One of those survivors traveled thanks to the generosity of concerned Maine citizens as we raised a little over $2000.

You may not know that about two weeks before the trial began on June 30th I learned that the Department of Peace Studies at UMO would sponsor my own trip to London to meet with the Chagos and to witness the trial.  To say it was a remarkable experience does not begin to state my gratitude for the opportunity to come to better know the issue and the privilege I felt to stand with the Chagossians.

I arrived in London early Saturday morning, June 28th, and was able to make my way to the home of an old friend, Maryclare Foa, in Peckam, southeast of Westminster and Parliament.  I had arranged to meet with Anne Stewart, the Chairperson of the UK Chagos Support Association, with whom I have had an email correspondence, at Waterloo Station, and was able to continue on to that noon appointment without a glitch.  Anne, originally from England, but now residing in Scotland, first became aware of the plight of the Chagossians while visiting Mauritius 10 years ago.  She was struck by the abject poverty in which they lived and has been a devout champion of their cause ever since.

Over lunch at Jubilee Gardens, in the shadow of the London Eye, my hopes for making Sunday a productive day were heartened as Ann was able to give me contact information for several of the principals with whom I had not been able to connect before leaving home.  Afterwards we walked across the Thames to Westminster Palace and the House of Lords where I was able to get the lay of the land for the rally scheduled prior to the convening of the trial on Monday morning.  I also had the opportunity to visit with Brian Haw, the anti-Iraq war protester, who has been at it for 2598 days as I write this–tenting in Parliament Square since June 2, 2001.  Brian began protesting the economic sanctions and bombing being conducted by the U.S. and U.K., acts of war that preceded “Shock and Awe”.  The chronology of Brian’s campaign is an inspiration in itself.  In the face of withering abuses by authorities, at times near farcical, he remains and today is joined by several other tenters.  In February of 2007, he was recognized as Channel 4’s (London’s public service television) Most Inspiring Political Figure 2007 (http://www.parliament-square.org.uk/about.html).

As we parted, Ann made it clear that she would shepherd me as needed over the next few days.  My first few phone calls that afternoon were all the more reassuring as, thanks to Ann, I was able to connect with Olivier Bancoult (leader of the Chagos Refugee Group), Bashir Kahn (Olivier’s spokesperson in England), and with Joanne Harma (Secretary, UK Chagos Support Association).  Bashir, a native of Mauritius, arranged for me to meet with Olivier and several of the Chagossian’s the next day.

Sunday morning, Maryclare, an artist who uses video and audio in her work, and I set off on the London trains for Wembley where most of the visiting Chagossians were being housed in a Travelodge Hotel.  I was to realize the greatest of my ambitions for the trip–interviews with survivors of the displacement in the ’60’s and ’70’s–some of the very same people introduced to us in John Pilger’s, Stealing a Nation.

“How old were you when you were removed from your home islands?”  ”Can you tell me about that day?”  ”How many generations back can you trace your family on Diego Garcia?”  ”Tell me about the transit by boat to Mauritius.”  ”What has life been like in Mauritius?”  ”Would you return if able?”   I explored these and many other questions.  Imagine the emotion–Maryclare, me, two video cameras (one being operated by one of the Chagossians) and 8-10 Chagossians all crowded into one of their rooms, tracing their stories for nearly three hours.  An absolute privilege!  I could have taken the next plane back and felt the trip well worthwhile.

But, Monday morning MC and I made the trip to London Bridge and then to Westminster Station, arriving for the 9am rally at Parliament Park opposite Westminster Palace.  We and a couple dozen other white faces joined the 70-100 Chagossians (in addition to the delegation up from Mauritius there were friends, families, and former neighbors who had immigrated to the U.K. and now reside in the hard-edged, industrial London suburb of Crawley).  For over an hour we acquainted ourselves with one another, chanted, “Let Them Return” to the towering edifice across the street and the equally implacable motorists passing by, and waved our signs and banners which expressed similar sentiment.  It felt all too symbolic of the struggle these people have waged.

Court was to convene at 11am and so we made our way through security, which was no more and no less annoying than that which we experience at Logan, around 10:15.  Though all of us (approximately 120) were able to enter the House of Lords, only 70 were permitted in the courtroom, a limitation many found very objectionable. (Note: One Australian journalist stormed off in disgust and impatience, declaring it an outrage)  The general sentiment, one I shared, was that priority ought to be given the Chagossians, meaning that several of us, Maryclare and I included, were unable to be in the courtroom for the initial proceedings– a great disappointment.  All was not lost however as we spent the next couple of hours grousing, but net-working in the coffee shop.  Among others, I met and have since developed connections with David Vine, journalist and professor of anthropology at American University–probably the leading authority on the Chagossian’s story in the U.S., Jorge Tittel, a Belgian born film-maker who is working on producing a fictionalized version of the deportation of the Diego Garcia people, Nigel Wenban-Smith, former commissioner of the British Indian Ocean Territory, Mario Li-Hing, a Mauritian chaplain who has been a long-time friend of the Chagossian’s cause, and Hengride Permal, Chagossian activist who lives in Crawley and takes the strident and arguably fair stand that, yes, her people must be permitted to return, but the base must go.

Thankfully, we were able to “make the cut” for the afternoon session and so I was afforded my first look at the judicial process in the U.K.  We had learned that the government had argued their case during the morning and would continue through the mid-day break on Tuesday.  The proceedings began, without ceremony, save a perfunctory bow to the five Lords on their entrance by all officials and spectators.  Barrister Jonathan Crow, QC (Queen’s Counsel), the lead lawyer for the government, picked up where he apparently had left off prior to the recess and spoke, essentially non-stop for the next three hours.  Flanked by his co-counsel to his right, he was also armed with perhaps 20 thick loose-leafed binders to which he would refer through the course of his argument.  To Crow’s left were Sir Sidney Kentridge, QC, for the Chagos and his two co-counsels, with their own library of resources.  The barristers, all in black robes and wigs faced the five Law Lords, a distinguished looking lot who, generally, seemed engaged and asked good questions.  The good old boy collegiality was a bit off-putting, no question, but as we would see when Sir Sidney (as he was often referred to by the Lords) had his day, the most deference seemed to be reserved for him.  Behind the barristers sat various supporting cast members of the respective legal teams and then, packed in close confines, the spectators– Chagossians, journalists, academics and other interested observers.

Crow droned on through the afternoon and, fascinating as it was, the four o’clock break no doubt was welcomed by us all.  Maryclare and I made the commute “home” and talked into the night, sharing our impressions of the day.  I was struck by and appreciated MC’s empathetic perceptions developed as a sensitive and keen observer of inequitable relationships.  She has spent years working and studying in Zimbabwe and in Papua, New Guinea where, she says, she began to awaken to the possibility that she, as a British citizen might not necessarily be superior thanks solely to birthright (Didn’t she know about Americans!).  She was particularly sensitive to the fact that the Chagossians were witnesses in court, but were not being heard and were hardly being seen.  ”Were they really being considered?” she wondered.  ”What were the Chagossians thinking?”  They could not understand much of what was being said, but knew it was their lives that hung in the balance.  They may have been wondering, “Are these Lords the descendants of the people in high places who were invested in the imperial system that 40 years ago uprooted our families, took them from their homeland, and dumped them in an alien place?

On Tuesday and Wednesday I made my way back to the House of Lords and joined the Chagos and their supporters as observers.  Crow continued through noon on Tuesday and, finally, we had the opportunity to hear Sir Sidney.  While Crow had been impressive, to say the least, Kentridge was worth the price of admission.  In my opinion he is as close to the essence of goodness as can be found in the system.  His performance belied his 86 years (by a bunch).  A South African by birth he earned his bona fides as council for the community at the investigation into the Sharpsville Massacre in 1961 and as the lawyer representing the family of Steve Biko at the inquest into his death.  Watching and hearing Sir Sidney was again a validation of my trip.

The issues of law in conflict being argued were protracted, often complex, and manifold.  Jet-lag and inability to hear what was being said (or to actually see the speakers at times) contributed to my difficulty in tracking the proceedings but might be distilled without drastically over-simplifying as follows.  Crow, representing the government argued:

• The Orders in Council (essentially the Royal decree) asserted by the government, which overturned the earlier judgments in favor of the Chagossians were legal and appropriate.
• Return of the Chagossians would be contrary to the national security interests of the U.K., the U.S. and the West.
• Resettlement was not feasible and would, in any event, be too costly.

Sir Sidney Kentridge argued on behalf of the Chagossians:

• The Orders in Council were “unreasonable, irrational, conspicuously unfair, disproportionate, and an abuse of power.”
• The defense interests of the U.K. and U.S. were exaggerated and not supported by fact.  Sir Sidney said, “It is not enough to say ‘national security.’  The question is one of evidence.
• The argument presented by the government that it would be unacceptably costly if not “unfeasible” for the Chagossians to return lacks credulity. (Note: The islands to which the Chagossians wish to return are over 100 miles from Diego Garcia!)

Attempting to further simplify the opposing arguments It seems to me to come down to national security interests (as insisted upon by the U.S.) versus the right not to be exiled or the “right of abode”.

Unfortunately, I had to take my leave in the middle of Wednesday, July 2nd.  The case was to continue through Thursday afternoon which denied me the opportunity to hear closing arguments and I have not been able to find any illuminating reports in the London press.  David Vine, the American U. professor was able to stay throughout the trial and has written, “The Chagossians’ case is fundamentally about the power of one group of people with more power and a lighter skin to dramatically control the lives of another group of people with little power and darker skin.”

The Chagossians have been waiting for justice for 40 years.  Many have died in the intervening years.  The wait continues.  As anticipated, the Lords will not announce their decision until October.  If the pre-decision signals are encouraging some of the Chagossians will return to London for another, hopefully final, triumphant walk out of Parliament.

We might continue to ask ourselves the question John Pilger raises at the end of his film, “Why do we, the citizens of powerful countries, continue to accept specious reasons for the unacceptable?”

Thanks again to all for your interest  in and support of the Chagossians and thanks to the Peace and Reconciliation Studies program at UMO for helping me further my exploration of this cause.  I will be anxious to speak more of this story at the slightest provocation and, in fact, be on guard– I may be back with hat in hand looking to help the Chagossians make their way back to London.