Starmer’s close friend Philippe Sands – chief counsel for Mauritius on Chagos since 2010 – appeared on The News Agents and discussed the surrender deal with Emily Maitlis in more detail than usual. Asked to explain why it makes sense that the UK is handing sovereignty away and paying for it, he said:
“Go back to the decision of February 2019 of the ICJ which said, in terms, the United Kingdom does not have sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago it is and has always been part of Mauritius. If you just look at the history of the litigation on that case, 28 international judges have had a chance to express a view as to who has sovereignty over the Chagos Archipelago – not one has supported a British claim to sovereignty.”
This is the man who said “Chinese initiatives [are] all underpinned by rules of international law.” Interestingly Sands didn’t bother repeating Starmer’s widely–rebuked satellite communications justification for the deal. That ICJ ruling was of course a non-binding advisory opinion issued after the UN General Assembly decided to change its maps to please Mauritius…
Sands made some other claims that Guido found interesting:
Questionable claims from the key campaigner for the Chagos surrender. Sands has boasted about how great it is to act against the UK in international courts…
Red Wall Labour backbencher Jonathan Brash told GB News that Starmer should resign:
“I’m completely fed up about it, and I think it’s got to the point now where I genuinely think that, as far as the Prime Minister is concerned, it’s not a case of if, it’s when.”