Abstract

The British Indian Ocean Territory’s (BIOT) establishment in the 1960s exemplifies the UK’s efforts to maintain global standing through imperial possessions. The colonised people of these islands, the Chagossians, were swiftly expelled, their interests subordinated to those of the imperial whole. This article re-evaluates the Chagossians’ legal resistance to their treatment, drawing upon archival releases which shed light on the earliest stages of their litigation. We contend that private law rights of exclusion have underpinned the UK Government’s approach to the saga, as they have done for colonised peoples in the past, including the Banabans on Ocean Island. These underpinnings have ensured that the UK Courts’ judicial review decisions have not been able to adequately address the Chagossians’ interests, let alone reverse their expulsion. Rigid categorisations of the Chagossians’ relationship to property and territory have further hampered their cause. We nonetheless maintain that the Supreme Court decision of Bancoult (No 2) leaves open the possibility of future legal challenges by the Chagossians against the UK Government’s latest refusal to authorise resettlement of parts of the BIOT. Ongoing litigation, however, requires that the courts accept that the Chagossians’ claims cannot be conceptualised in narrow public law terms, with Commonwealth Aboriginal/Indigenous-title jurisprudence providing one as-yet-unexplored avenue.

中文翻译：

---

国土：重新审视查戈斯人的诉讼

摘要

1960年代英属印度洋领地（BIOT）的建立体现了英国为通过帝国财产保持全球地位所做的努力。这些岛屿的殖民者查戈斯人被迅速驱逐出境，其利益服从于整个帝国的利益。本文根据档案的发布情况，重新评估了查戈斯人对其待遇的法律抵制，这为诉讼的最早阶段提供了启示。我们认为，与过去对殖民地人民（包括大洋洲的香蕉岛）所做的做法一样，私法的排他性权利也支持了英国政府对这一传奇的态度。这些基础确保了英国法院的司法复审决定无法充分解决查戈斯人的利益，更不用说将其驱逐出境了。查戈斯人与财产和领土的关系的严格分类进一步阻碍了他们的事业。尽管如此，我们认为最高法院的裁决Bancoult（第2名）使查戈斯人对英国政府最近拒绝批准BIOT的部分地区重新安置的最新法律挑战留有余地。然而，正在进行的诉讼要求法院接受，不能以狭义的公法术语将查戈斯人的主张概念化，英联邦的原住民/土著产权法理学提供了一种尚未探索的途径。