In the Chagos Advisory Opinion, the ICJ held that the detachment of the Chagos Archipelago from colonial Mauritius had not been based on the free and genuine expression of the will of the Mauritian people and had thus been unlawful. This chapter sheds light on the intriguing heightened scrutiny standard, applied but not defined by the ICJ, and the reasons that convinced the Court to hold that the consent given by the Mauritian representatives was invalid.
Monday, May 18, 2020
Fajdiga et al.: Heightened Scrutiny of Colonial Consent according to the Chagos Advisory Opinion: Pandora's Box Reopened?
Mohor Fajdiga, Ula Aleksandra Kos, Gregor Oprčkal, Anže Mediževec, Pia Novak, Ana Samobor, Miha Plahutnik, Anže Kimovec, Urša Demšar, Vid Drole, & Hana Šerbec (all Univ. of Ljubljana - Law) have posted Heightened Scrutiny of Colonial Consent according to the Chagos Advisory Opinion: Pandora's Box Reopened? (in The International Court of Justice and Decolonization: New Directions from the Chagos Advisory Opinion, T. Burri & J. Trinidad eds., forthcoming). Here's the abstract: