Galleries more

Videos more

Audio more

Dictionary more

Continued BIOT-Type control over Diego Garcia. Question Addressed to Paul Bérenger

17.09.2025

Question Addressed to Paul Bérenger VPM, and Why Don’t Journalists ask him this


Did Paul Bérenger and The Prime Minister Ramgoolam know about the contents of Section 3 in the BIOT Act that was passed by the House of Commons in London on 9 September, and that Bérenger spoke about at his Press Conference celebrating BIOT being revoked? And, if they knew, did they inform the Cabinet?


Clause 3 of the new UK Act passed by the House of Commons reads as follows:


“Section 3


“(1) The law of the British Indian Ocean Territory immediately before commencement [of the Act] continues as the law of Diego Garcia.


“(2) Any legislation or rule of law of any of His Majesty’s dominions that related to the British Indian Ocean Territory immediately before commencement relates in the same way to Diego Garcia.


“(3) It follows, in particular, that His Majesty has under his prerogative the like powers to make laws for Diego Garcia as His Majesty had before commencement for the British Indian Ocean Territory.


When did Paul Berenger and Navin Ramgoolam know about these three “saving” clauses? Before they read the Bill last week? Or only when they read it? How can they claim that BIOT has been totally revoked? How can they claim “sovereignty” over Diego Garcia when they sign up to THIS?


If they knew before hand, why did they hide it from the people?


If they did not know until they read the Bill, how was it that in LALIT we had warned beforehand that this would be the case, and yet they did not know? And why have they not so far denounced the “perfidy” of Albion if they were, in fact, blind-sided by it?


And in LALIT, we call on journalists to pose these questions to the leaders of the Alliance in power. 


To be clear, here is what the House of Commons Research Briefing dated 5 September 2025 published together with the Bill says, to explain Section 3 of the new Act, if anyone fails to grasp the meaning of Section 3, itself: 


“Continued administration of Diego Garcia  (clause 3)


“General ‘saving’ power of BIOT legislation


“Subsection (1) of clause 3 provides that the legislation that applies to the BIOT at the time of the commencement of this clause will be “saved” and will then apply only to Diego Garcia.


“Subsection (2) also saves any legislation or rule of law in the UK and any of the Crown Dependencies or the Overseas Territories which currently relates to the BIOT. The exception is the British Nationality Act 1981, clause 4, subsection The explanatory notes state that this “establishes a default position of continuity in the law of and relating to Diego Garcia, to avoid legal gaps on entry into force of the Treaty”.


“Once the treaty is in force, new laws for Diego Garcia will be made by the power in clause 5 of this bill.


“Clarifications and definitions of the saving power Subsection (3) clarifies that the King will continue to use his prerogative powers to legislate for Diego Garcia once the treaty is in force, as he currently does for the BIOT.


“Subsection (4)(a) ensures that any laws that relate to the BIOT by virtue of it being listed as a British Overseas Territory in schedule 6 of the British Nationality Act 1981 will also be preserved and continue to apply to Diego Garcia, even though clause 2 of this bill will remove reference to the BIOT in schedule 6.


“Subsection (4)(b), according to the explanatory notes, will mean that “laws saved by subsection (1) or (2) can be amended at or after commencement in the usual way, notwithstanding that saving”.


“Subsection (5) provides that the saving power will also apply to the BIOT (Constitution) Order 2004 (revoked by clause 2(2) of this bill). The order, including legislation made by the Commissioner for BIOT under section 3 of that order, is saved and will become part of the law of Diego Garcia.


“Subsection (6) defines “Diego Garcia” in this bill as including the whole area over which the UK is entitled to exercise jurisdiction by virtue of articles 2 and 9 of the treaty.”


LALIT’s conclusion is “plus colonialiste que ça, tu meurs”. And if we may add, the burden that Ramgoolam, Bérenger, Duval and Subron have to bear in the future for having “vann Diego” is a very heavy one indeed. 


LALIT, 17 September 2025