CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION

1.1 These proceedings were initiated by the Republic of Mauritius on 20 December 2010 by its Notification and Statement of Claim under Article 287 and Annex VII, Article 1 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (“UNCLOS”, or “the Convention”). 

1.2 In accordance with the timetable set out in the Rules of Procedure adopted by the Tribunal on 29 March 2012, Mauritius submitted its Memorial on 1 August 2012. This set out the facts and legal arguments by which Mauritius challenges the right of the UK to establish a “Marine Protected Area” (“MPA”) and other maritime zones around the Chagos Archipelago, and the compatibility of the “MPA” and such zones with the Convention. In its Memorial, Mauritius set out the reasons why it considers the “MPA” to be unlawful under the Convention. It explained that the “MPA” constitutes a regime imposed unilaterally by a State with no authority to do so, in a manner that was plainly inconsistent with the requirements of the Convention.

1.3 On 31 October 2012, the United Kingdom (“UK”) filed Preliminary Objections to Jurisdiction, and requested that those objections be dealt with as a preliminary matter, separate from the Tribunal’s consideration of the merits. Mauritius did not accept that proposal because it considered that none of the UK’s jurisdictional objections were suitable for resolution as preliminary matters.

1.4 Mauritius filed its Written Observations on the Question of Bifurcation on 21 November 2012. The UK submitted its Written Reply to Mauritius’ Observations on 21 December 2012. The Tribunal held a one-day hearing on the question of bifurcation in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, on 11 January 2013. On 15 January 2013, the Tribunal issued Procedural Order No. 2, by which it rejected the UK’s request that its Preliminary Objections be dealt with as a separate jurisdictional phase and decided that those objections would be considered alongside the proceedings on the merits.

1.5 On 15 July 2013 the UK submitted its Counter-Memorial, requesting the Tribunal to find that it is without jurisdiction and also addressing the merits of Mauritius’ claim. The UK Counter-Memorial offers a first effort by the UK to set out legal arguments and supporting evidence to justify its purported right to create the “MPA” around the Chagos Archipelago, declared unilaterally on 1 April 2010. In many respects, the arguments are presented for the first time to Mauritius. Given the novelty of the material, this Reply is of a greater length than might normally be expected.