Chagos: Glover Exposes Jugnauth’s Bad Faith in Response to Agreement Critics

After six months of silence, former Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth has publicly criticized the new agreement between Mauritius and the United Kingdom regarding the Chagos archipelago. At a press conference held at the Sun Trust Building, he described the deal as a “disguised loss of sovereignty” and stated that he would never have signed such an agreement if he were still in power.

In response, Attorney General Gavin Glover accused Jugnauth of bad faith regarding sovereignty issues. Jugnauth claims that the current government has undone the progress made during his administration.

He argued that the new treaty undermines Mauritius’s sovereignty by giving the UK a say—potentially even a veto—over any development initiatives in the archipelago, except for Diego Garcia. He expressed his frustration, saying, “Even to put up a pole in Peros Banhos or Salomon, we will need permission from the British.”

He also emphasized the financial terms of the agreement, stating that the previous deal included a $2 billion fund for infrastructure and an annual payment adjusted for inflation starting in the 11th year.

In contrast, the new agreement delays this adjustment to the 14th year and shortens the financial commitment from 35 to 25 years.

One of the most controversial aspects of the May 22 agreement, according to Jugnauth, is the decision-making mechanism established by the treaty.

Any disagreements will now be resolved by a Joint Commission made up of representatives from Mauritius, the UK, and the US.

The MSM party views this as a dilution of Mauritius’s sovereignty, as it would lose final decision-making power over projects related to the archipelago.

Attorney General’s Response: “Bad Faith” and Legal Clarification

The government quickly responded to Jugnauth’s claims. In a statement, Attorney General Gavin Glover, who led the negotiations for the Alliance du Changement, firmly rejected the former Prime Minister’s allegations.

He stated that the treaty explicitly guarantees Mauritius’s sovereignty over all the Chagos islands (Article 1) and ensures the right of return for Chagossians, excluding Diego Garcia (Article 6).

Glover asserted, “Any suggestion that sovereignty is incomplete or that the right of return is threatened is a matter of bad faith interpretation.”

He justified the security clauses by referencing Mauritius’s international commitments and the requirements related to the Anglo-American military presence.

MSM Maintains Pressure: “The Public Deserves the Truth”

In response, the MSM released a statement highlighting several unresolved issues they believe the Attorney General has not clarified. The party is demanding clear answers on:

• The UK’s veto power over other islands.
• The actual role of the Joint Commission (advisory or decision-making?).
• The loss of final decision-making power during a security review.

The MSM insists that sovereignty remains a central issue and accuses the government of trying to “muddy the waters.”

They argue that the Mauritian people deserve clear answers and a national debate on the future of the archipelago.

A Renewed Debate Just Six Months After the Last Elections

This controversy arises just six months after the general elections, which saw a defeat for Jugnauth and his party.

While the government presents the treaty signed on May 22 as a diplomatic achievement, the opposition views it as a masked setback.

The debate surrounding the Chagos and what true sovereignty means is far from over.

Looking Ahead to the Chagos

Following the signing of the sovereignty treaty for the Chagos, Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam chaired a preparatory meeting for an official visit to the archipelago.

Paul Bérenger, Gavin Glover, and Olivier Bancoult were present. Ramgoolam stated, “We need to define the composition of the delegation, transportation means, and travel arrangements.”

Bancoult welcomed it as “a historic moment, eagerly awaited by the Chagossians.”

In the opposition, the PMSD is urging the government to make the initial agreement under the previous regime public.

Spokesperson Olivier Barbe stated, “Mauritians should form their own opinions.”

He also questioned the real powers of the Joint Commission in case of a deadlock and reminded that Sir Gaëtan Duval advocated for the employment of Chagossians in Diego Garcia as early as the 1970s.

Nando Bodha criticized the lack of transparency in the treaty. He called for its submission to the Assembly and raised concerns about unresolved issues:

Rights over Diego Garcia, the right of return for exiles, and the management of the £45 million British credit line.

“This is not just a simple bilateral agreement but a matter of truth, justice, and sovereignty,” Bodha concluded.

Source: Le Mauricien