Fifty Years of the British Indian Ocean Territory: Legal Perspectives

In: The World of Small States Ser. v.4

Abstract

Intro -- Contents -- About the Contributors -- Chapter 1: Introduction -- 1.1 Introduction -- 1.2 The Aim of This Collection -- 1.3 The Contributors -- References -- Chapter 2: Justifying Bancoult (No 2): Why Justice Hercules Must Sometimes Disappoint Us -- 2.1 Introduction -- 2.2 Bancoult (No 2) and Its Critics -- 2.2.1 Was the Prerogative Power of Colonial Governance Limited by a Fundamental Right? -- 2.2.2 Did the Formulation 'Peace, Order and Good Government' Connote a Limited or Plenary Prerogative Power? -- 2.2.3 Did Judges Have the Power to Review the Reasons Given by the Government for Removing the Chagossians Islanders? -- 2.3 Positivism and Pragmatism in Bancoult (No 2) -- 2.3.1 What's Wrong with Positivist Textual Analysis? -- 2.3.2 A Pragmatist Way Out? -- 2.4 Enter Justice Hercules -- 2.4.1 Interpreting Bancoult (No 2) -- 2.4.2 Two Competing Schemes of Principle: 'Moral No-Difference' and 'Moral Difference' -- 2.4.2.1 Moral No-Difference -- 2.4.2.2 Moral Difference -- 2.5 Isn't It Justice Hercules's Job to Do Justice? -- 2.6 Conclusion -- References -- Chapter 3: Environmental Protection v the Right of Abode: A Case-Study in the Misuse of Power -- 3.1 Introduction -- 3.2 The Legal Flaws in the 2009 Consultation -- 3.3 The Position Today -- References -- Chapter 4: How Public Law Has Not Been Able to Provide the Chagossians with a Remedy -- 4.1 Introduction -- 4.2 Background -- 4.3 First Attempts at a Remedy: The Vencatassen Case -- 4.3.1 Settlement Terms Are Mis-Described -- 4.3.2 Chagossians Are Misinformed -- 4.4 The Judicial Review in Bancoult (No. 1) and Its Evolution -- 4.4.1 Procedural Reform -- 4.4.2 Do Your Homework First -- 4.4.3 How Did the High Court Declare the Exile Unlawful? -- 4.5 The Group Litigation: Chagos Islanders v Attorney General and HM BIOT Commissioner [2003] EWHC 2222 (QB).