UK Politics
Lawyer Who Argued Against Britain on Chagos Elected as UK’s Judge at UN Court
Dapo Akande, who argued against Britain in the Chagos case, is elected the UK’s judge at the UN court, and Andy Burnham says he is incredibly proud.
Your vote
Should Britain keep the Chagos Islands, whatever the UN court says?
News | By Matt, Editor
A lawyer who argued against Britain in the Chagos Islands case at the United Nations’ top court will now sit on that court as the UK’s judge, after winning a vote at the UN in New York on Tuesday night.
Professor Dapo Akande, an Oxford academic, was elected to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) for a nine-year term that starts in 2027. Andy Burnham said he was “incredibly proud” (GOV.UK).
Key facts
- Professor Akande was elected on 3 November by the UN General Assembly and Security Council, alongside judges from France, Jordan, Singapore and Kenya.
- He was nominated in 2024 under Sir Keir Starmer, with the backing of Attorney General Lord Hermer, The Telegraph reports.
- In 2018 he spoke for Zambia at the ICJ hearings that led to the 2019 ruling against Britain on Chagos.
- Last month he said the chance of Britain handing over Chagos without that ruling “would have been zero”.
- Mauritius has threatened to take legal action over delays to Labour’s Chagos deal.
What he told the court
The Chagos case reached the ICJ in 2018, when the UN General Assembly asked the judges for an advisory opinion. Britain argued it was really a sovereignty row between London and Port Louis, and that the court should not rule on it without British consent.
1 commentTap to readProfessor Akande, speaking for Zambia, rejected that. “This case is about the international law obligations regarding decolonization,” he told the judges, and it was “not purely bilateral” (ICJ verbatim record, 6 September 2018).
He went further. Britain’s separation of Chagos from Mauritius in 1965 was “a plain violation of the right of self-determination”, he said, which meant “the decolonization of Mauritius has not been lawfully completed, and we urge you to so decide”.
In February 2019 the court did just that. It said the UK was “under an obligation to bring to an end its administration of the Chagos Archipelago as rapidly as possible” (ICJ). Ministers have pointed to the legal risk flowing from that opinion ever since.
“Would have been zero”
Professor Akande has been open about what the ruling achieved. Speaking on the Asymmetrical Haircuts podcast last month, he said: “Without the advisory opinion at the ICJ, none of this would have happened. So this shows actually the influence of international law” (The Telegraph).
He added: “We’re not there yet because the Chagos Islands are still actually with the UK… Let’s hope we get there.”
His record goes beyond Chagos. In 2018 Labour, then led by Jeremy Corbyn, published his legal opinion that the RAF strikes on Syria after the Douma chemical attack were “not in accordance with the United Nations Charter and international law” (HuffPost UK). He has also advised Conservative attorneys general, the paper has noted (The Telegraph).
We first reported on his candidacy in August, when Ed Miliband called him an “ideal candidate” (Miliband’s ICJ pick).
Burnham and Miliband cheer
The Government hailed the result as a win. “This election is a clear signal to our partners that the UK is back on the world stage,” the Prime Minister said. Professor Akande, he added, “will bring integrity, legal rigour and independent expertise” to the court (GOV.UK).
Foreign Secretary Ed Miliband said: “Everywhere I go around the world, people tell me how impressive Professor Akande is and we have been proud to support his campaign.”
Professor Akande pledged “to serve with independence” and to decide cases on “a faithful and impartial application of the law”. Britain has had no judge on the court for almost a decade, since it lost its seat in 2017 (BBC, 2017).
Why it matters now
Labour’s deal, signed in May 2025, would hand sovereignty of Chagos to Mauritius and lease back the Diego Garcia base for 99 years, at a cost critics say could reach £35 billion. It stalled when Donald Trump withdrew his support, and Defence Secretary Wes Streeting says it is being reviewed (BBC). Mr Burnham has kept it alive.
Mauritius is losing patience. Its prime minister, Navin Ramgoolam, warned last month that his country was prepared to “take the legal route” unless the deadlock was “expeditiously resolved”. Whitehall fears Britain could end up back before the ICJ (The Telegraph).
If that happens, the court’s rules matter. A judge from a country in the case keeps the right to sit. But no judge may decide a case they have “previously taken part” in as counsel or advocate, and any doubt is settled by the court itself (ICJ Statute, Articles 17 and 31). Whether a fresh Mauritius claim would count as the same case is an open question.
Reform and the Tories
Reform UK has opposed handing over the islands from the start, and last month called the deal “yet another Tory sellout” as the two parties traded blows over who began the talks (our report).
Nigel Farage has said he would offer America the use of Diego Garcia “in perpetuity” rather than give up sovereignty (Farage on Chagos).
Peers have already voted to give Chagossians a veto over any handover, a bill the Government opposes (the Lords vote). For more on Labour’s record abroad, see our report on Burnham’s £40m for the Caribbean and on Lord Hermer’s defence of the deal.
Our view
Professor Akande is entitled to his views, and no one doubts his legal standing. Nor do we suggest he will be anything other than independent on the bench. The question is about the judgement of the politicians who chose him.
Of all the lawyers in Britain, Labour put forward one who stood up at The Hague and argued that the country he will now sit for broke the law over Chagos. He then told a podcast that without that ruling there would be no handover at all. Mauritius is threatening to sue. Ministers still say the deal is “necessary”.
British voters were never asked about giving away British territory. They are now asked to cheer as one of the case’s champions takes Britain’s seat at the court that started it.
Should Britain keep the Chagos Islands, whatever the UN court says? Vote in our poll below.
Sources
- GOV.UK, FCDO press release, 3 November 2026
- The Telegraph, 3 November 2026
- ICJ verbatim record CR 2018/27, 6 September 2018
- ICJ, Chagos advisory opinion, 25 February 2019
- Statute of the International Court of Justice
- HuffPost UK, 16 April 2018
- The Telegraph, 19 October 2024
- The Telegraph, 10 October 2026
- BBC News, 23 September 2026
- BBC News, 21 November 2017
Discover more from Breaking Brexit News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Don’t stop here
‘Take Me to France’: Crew Asleep as Man Allegedly Tries to Take 100-Tonne Trawler From Ramsgate
Best of X Today: Jenrick’s ‘£30m v £40m’ Jibe, Farage’s ‘73%’ and the King’s No-Apology Row
Burnham Promised Miners ‘Every Penny’. His Budget Kept £1.2bn Back
Have your say
Your reaction
Mum it’s one of them leftie judges again……….. wiggled their way into an authority, using their new power to suit their agenda……. we actually need a panel of members of public who can scrutinise judges judgements and if all agree they should be able to overturn the decision