Toggle Main Menu Toggle Search

Open Access padlockePrints

The Newcastle University research output collection, currently available on ePrints, will shortly be moving to a new open repository platform, Figshare. To prepare for the data migration we have paused adding new content to ePrints, and will resume once the new repository is launched. During this time you will continue to have access to ePrints (but no new content will appear). We will share updates here when available.

The Rules-Based Order, International Law and the British Indian Ocean Territory: Do as I Say, Not as I Do

Lookup NU author(s): Dr Elena KatselliORCiD

Downloads

Licence

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

Abstract

Perpetuating Britain’s controversial administration of the Chagos Archipelago (or BIOT – British Indian Ocean Territory) raises questions about the UK’s commitment to the rules-based order and international law. This interdisciplinary article examines British administration of the Chagos Archipelago by taking a legal-international relations perspective. It provides an overview to the rules-based order concept and its relation with international law, briefly examines the Territory’s history, and outlines how the BIOT violates the principles enshrined in the rules-based order concept, specifically promotion of self-determination, prohibition of forced displacement and respect for international institutions. This study is significant due to its timing – set in a period of increased international pressure on the United Kingdom to cede sovereignty of the Chagos Archipelago to Mauritius – and also significant in a period of increased rules-based order strain throughout the Indo-Pacific. This article argues that, despite Britain’s assertion that it is a champion of the rules-based order, of which international law is a component, continued British administration of the Chagos Archipelago is in contravention of both. In an era of rules-based order strain, brought about by the rise of China and a surge in nationalistic populism, British BIOT policy provides fertile ground to criticisms of its foreign policy and international law selectivity and double standards.

Publication metadata

Author(s): Bashfield S, Katselli Proukaki E

Publication type: Article

Publication status: Published

Journal: German Law Journal

Year: 2022

Volume: 23

Issue: 5

Pages: 713-737

Online publication date: 29/06/2022

Acceptance date: 04/08/2021

Date deposited: 10/08/2021

ISSN (electronic): 2071-8322

Publisher: Cambridge University Press

URL: https://doi.org/10.1017/glj.2022.44

DOI: 10.1017/glj.2022.44

Altmetrics

Altmetrics provided by Altmetric

Share