A High Court judicial review brought by Chagossian representatives and championed by the Great British PAC has now been awaiting judgment for more than four months, despite the court previously recognising the case as urgent.
Yet Mauritius Attorney General Gavin Glover appeared to know exactly when the decision would be delivered. Speaking last week, Mr Glover said he had been told the judgment in the case before Mrs Justice Stacey would be issued imminently. The remarks have prompted a simple but serious question: how could a foreign government’s Attorney General appear to know the timing of a UK High Court judgment in a case involving British Chagossian citizens and the Labour Government? Critics are now asking who provided that information, and why.
The case, brought by Louis Misley Mandarin and Louis Michel Mandarin, challenges decisions by the UK Labour Government relating to Diego Garcia and the future of the Chagos Islands.
The claim was issued in the High Court of Justice on 24 June 2025. Within 48 hours the court abridged the timetable, acknowledging the need for expedition. Yet the case remains stuck at the first procedural hurdle.
An urgent oral permission hearing took place on 28 October 2025. The judge reserved judgment and indicated that a decision would follow shortly. Over four months later, the ruling has still not been delivered.
A “Low Threshold” Decision Still Pending
Permission hearings in judicial review cases do not determine the merits of a claim. They simply decide whether a case is arguable and should proceed to a full hearing. Courts consistently describe this as a low threshold test.
Without a permission ruling, the claimants cannot proceed to a substantive judicial review. Nor can they appeal to the Court of Appeal if permission is refused.
For months, the claimants’ legal team have been requesting updates from the court. No timetable for judgment has been provided.
Meanwhile the Political Process Moved On
While the court has remained silent, political developments surrounding Diego Garcia have continued at pace. During the same four-month period:
• Parliamentary processes relating to Diego Garcia arrangements have progressed through both the House of Commons and the House of Lords
• Sovereignty negotiations have continued
• Public debate over the future of the Chagos Islands has intensified
- All that remains left to do is for the deal to be ratified.
In December 2025, members of the Chagossian community, announced the creation of a Government in Exile, citing frustration at the lack of meaningful consultation over decisions affecting their homeland.
Campaigners argue that the longer the legal challenge remains unresolved, the greater the risk that judicial scrutiny becomes irrelevant if political decisions are finalised first.
A Remarkable Comment from Mauritius
The situation took a further unexpected turn last week after comments by Mauritius’ Attorney General Gavin Glover appeared to reference the timing of the High Court’s judgment.
In remarks captured on video, Attorney General Gavin Glover said: “You recall the JR brought by Misley… I was told it will be out this week. Now I’ve been told it will be next week.”
Glover’s comments have raised an obvious question. How could a foreign government’s Attorney General appear to know when a UK High Court judgment would be delivered when the claimants themselves had received no such timetable? Mr Glover stated this on 6 March 2026.
Courts normally communicate directly with the parties to a case. External political figures are not typically briefed on the expected timing of judicial decisions. The source of the information referenced by Mr Glover therefore remains unclear.
If such expectations were being conveyed through diplomatic or governmental channels, constitutional lawyers say it could raise serious questions about the separation between the courts and the executive.
Lawyers Say Judgment May Now Be Imminent
Today, 9 March 2026, the claimants’ legal team indicated that the court may now be close to delivering its long-awaited decision.
Counsel for the claimants has advised that the judge may hand down judgment shortly, although no formal timetable has been confirmed.
The claimants have already instructed their lawyers to seek permission to appeal should the ruling go against them.
“Justice Delayed is Justice Denied”
Interim Chagossian First Minister Misley Mandarin said the continued delay was deeply concerning. “Justice delayed is justice denied,” he said.
“The Chagossian people have waited decades to have their voices heard about the future of our homeland. This hearing took place in October. We are still waiting for a simple decision about whether our case can proceed.”
He added that political decisions about the islands were continuing while the court process remained unresolved. Mr Mandarin said the Chagossian community was now organising governance on the islands themselves.
“We are now on the Chagos Islands. We are here. We are no longer a government in exile, we are a government here, organising and building our future.”
He criticised the UK Government’s plans regarding the islands.
“Once again the Labour Government wants to force us from our islands. We have another judicial review hearing this Friday, 13 March, to see if the courts say we can stay on our islands. It is difficult not to question why a judgment in the previous case might suddenly appear now, months after the hearing that was organised last summer and was finally heard in October. It’s suspicious. Has someone finally been asked to deliver the judgement just days before the second Judicial Review?”
“But whatever happens we will not stop fighting and we are not leaving. These islands are our homeland. The Chagossian people want to remain British, and this Labour Government has no right to hand our islands to Mauritius, which has no rightful claim to them.”
“They will have to force us from our homeland. We will not leave willingly. I would rather die than see our islands handed to Mauritius. I am here with my father, who was born here, and he feels the same. We are Chagossians, we are home, and our people will not be pushed aside again.”
For now, the central question remains unresolved…
Why has a decision on a supposedly low-threshold judicial review permission hearing taken more than four months?
And how did a foreign government appear to know when that decision might arrive?
Until the High Court delivers its ruling, those questions are likely to continue to grow.
Main Image: Screengrab / X
