A Chagossian who served in the British Armed Forces has written a powerful open letter to every member of the House of Lords, urging them to reject the Government’s plan to transfer sovereignty of the Chagos Islands to Mauritius when peers debate the issue on Tuesday.
In the letter, Misley Mandarin, a British citizen and Chagossian descendant, calls on the Lords to use their conscience, compassion, and courage to stop what he describes as a new act of colonialism that would compound the injustice of his people’s forced exile.
The appeal comes ahead of the second reading of the Diego Garcia and British Indian Ocean Territory Bill, which would implement the UK, Mauritius Treaty signed in May 2025. The treaty would end British sovereignty over the islands, known collectively as the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), paving the way for their handover to Mauritius.
Between 1968 and 1973, more than 1,000 Chagossians were forcibly removed from the islands by the British Government to make way for a US military base on Diego Garcia. Most were resettled in Mauritius and the Seychelles, where many families have since lived in poverty and discrimination.
In his letter, Mandarin writes:
“For more than half a century, my people have lived in exile. We were born British, but we were exiled by Britain. Between 1968 and 1973, our parents and grandparents were forcibly removed from our homeland in the Chagos Archipelago to make way for a foreign military base.”
Mandarin warns that the new treaty “does not guarantee British Chagossians any right of return” and “ends our British Overseas Territories citizenship, the very status Parliament granted us in 2022 to right a historic wrong.”
He adds that the trust fund promised as part of the deal “is for Mauritius, not for British Chagossians. Once again, others will speak for us, spend for us, and decide for us.”
Calling the agreement “colonialism under a new name,” Mandarin argues that Chagossians have been denied the basic democratic rights afforded to other British Overseas Territories.
“There has been no referendum, no consultation, no consent. When Gibraltar and the Falkland Islands faced decisions about their sovereignty, their people were given a voice. Why do we not deserve the same rights to self-determination and consultation?”
“Is our ethnic group not worthy? Is it because we are a small, Black, Christian community with no wealth and no power? Are we not equally entitled to self-determination as the people of other British Overseas Territories?”
The Government has justified the handover by citing an advisory opinion from the International Court of Justice (ICJ) and a UN resolution that supported Mauritius’s claim. But Mandarin says that “the ICJ’s opinion is not binding law” and “cannot and should not override the right of a people to determine their own future.”
He also quotes a 2023 Human Rights Watch report that described the deep poverty, discrimination, and “emotional devastation” suffered by exiled Chagossians, many of whom call their grief sagren.
Mandarin argues that the UK is now breaking its own stated policy on the Overseas Territories. Citing a 2012 Government white paper, he writes:
“The UK is committed to defend the Territories and protect their peoples from external threats, ensuring their right of self-determination.”
He continues: “Why are we ignored again now? Please, My Lords, stop this shameful treatment and speak up on the Bill.”
“It is not inevitable”
Addressing claims by some ministers and peers that the treaty is already effectively decided, Mandarin points to the text of the agreement itself.
“Article 18 of the Treaty makes it clear that it has not entered into force, and will not do so unless and until both the UK and Mauritius have completed their internal legal processes,” he writes.
“Paragraph 7 of the Bill’s Explanatory Notes confirms that this Bill is the UK’s internal requirement. In plain terms, if this Bill does not become law, the Treaty cannot come into force. It is not inevitable, despite what ministers may claim.”
Mandarin stresses that the Lords have the constitutional power to block the treaty by rejecting the Bill outright:
“If the Lords reject the Bill as a whole, you will have prevented the Government from compounding the original injustice of the forced removal of the Chagossians with the new injustice of denying us our right to self-determination.”
He warns peers that “a vote for the Bill is, in truth, a vote against self-determination” and urges them to “reject the Bill, stop the Treaty, and revisit the 2015 BIOT resettlement plan under British sovereignty,” which he says offered a “fair and viable path for Chagossians to rebuild their lives in their homeland.”
Mandarin ends his appeal with a plea for compassion and justice:
“Help us to return home, as is our right. Help us to be recognised not as an inconvenient footnote of empire, but as a British community who have served, suffered, and remained loyal despite everything. We have been exiled long enough.”
He also addresses the Lords Spiritual, writing:
“We are a Christian people cast out of our homeland. I ask you to stand with us in fellowship, as you would with any displaced and persecuted community, and to call for compassion, truth, and moral leadership.”
Mandarin’s letter has been circulated to all members of the House of Lords. The Great British PAC, which supported his recent High Court challenge against the Treaty, said it hopes peers will “listen to the Chagossians themselves, not just to government lawyers.”
The High Court judge in that case is expected to rule this week on whether the legal challenge organised by the Great British PAC will lead to a full hearing.
The Lords debate on Tuesday represents a critical moment. If peers reject the Bill in its entirety, the Treaty cannot be ratified. Under Article 18 of the Treaty, it would remain unsigned in law, and the Government would be forced to abandon or reintroduce it in a future session.
For the Chagossians, who were once exiled by force, the coming days may determine whether they are erased again, or finally heard.
