Content area
Full Text
UNCLOS
In March 2015, a Tribunal appointed under Annex 7 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) ruled that the 2010 establishment by the United Kingdom of a Marine Protected Area (MPA) around the Chagos Archipelago was incompatible with the Convention. The Tribunal declared that it is now open for both parties in the arbitration proceedings initiated by Mauritius to enter into the negotiations that should have taken place prior to the proclamation of the MPA, with a view to achieving a mutually satisfactory arrangement for protecting the marine environment.
A review of the Tribunal's decision appeared in an earlier issue of EPL,1 and was followed by Peter Harris's further analysis of the Award. The latter noted the "broader point that environmental conservation is best served when proponents of specific conservation initiatives - politicians and civil society campaigners alike - demonstrate strategic cognisance of the legal and political context in which they operate".2 Both articles have highlighted the issues relating to jurisdiction and the Tribunal's decisions on breaches of UNCLOS by the UK.
The Tribunal decided unanimously that, in establishing the MPA around the Chagos Archipelago, the UK breached its obligations under Articles 2(3), 56(2) and 194(4) of the Convention. In reaching this decision, the Tribunal relied heavily on its findings regarding the "undertakings" given by the UK in the 1965 Agreement between the two countries. These undertakings are referred to as the "Lancaster House undertakings".3 The Tribunal took the view that, "the legal effect of the 1965 Agreement is... a central element of the Parties' submissions on Mauritius' Fourth Submission,4 insofar as it involves the Lancaster House Undertakings".
This paper examines the incompatibility of the Lancaster House undertakings with the UK's declaration of the Chagos MPA, and discusses them in detail in terms of Mauritius's reversionary interests in the Archipelago. It takes a closer look at the undertakings and their legal implications in relation to the establishment of an MPA by the UK. Before turning to the decision, it sets the historical background to the dispute between Mauritius and the UK over the Chagos Archipelago and the reasons why Mauritius decided to initiate proceedings under Article 7.
Historical Background
As Harris noted, "The lesson to be learnt from...