The UK Chagos Support
Association (UKChSA) is in disarray as myself and three of the nine existing
senior committee members have resigned simultaneously. It is an extraordinary turn of events, and
this post deals with many of the issues that have led to this unprecedented
course of action. It is, for all
concerned, an entirely tragic state of affairs, but to remain in such a
discredited organisation would only serve to legitimise the Association which
is not fit for purpose.
My first contact with the UKChSA
(or UKCSA as it was originally known in those days before a cement company
objected to the use of the acronym) came in the autumn of 2004. It was the morning after the broadcast of
John Pilger’s ground-breaking documentary “Stealing a Nation” and Celia
Whittaker was the first person who ever interacted with me about the
cause. Within a couple of weeks I was
emailing friends to raise awareness about the cause and my journey as an
activist highlighting the plight of Chagossians was born.
It was a path which would lead to me lobbying
MP’s and journalists. Social networking
was exploding as a phenomenon and it was not long before I came into contact
with Peter Harris and Sabrina Jean. In
the spring of 2010 I was contacted by somebody who managed a youth news agency
I was part of between 1994 and 1998. She
was now living in Canada and wanted me
to write something for a website she worked on. I leapt at the opportunity. The piece was well received and six
months later I was invited to write again for the website following the
exposure of the Wikileaks scandal.
Just over twelve months later,
I was elected on to the committee of the UKChSA after being asked by Celia to
replace her as editor of the monthly newsletter. She was standing down after a decade in the
role. It was something that filled me with immense pride. I had really enjoyed writing again, but this
was the opportunity to utilise that passion in the most productive way
possible.
I made a few initial
observations during the period when I was working closely with Celia as the
handover from her capable hands to my inexperienced care started to take
shape. I noted that the UKChSA was doing
a wonderful job but I feared that it played a role in contributing to a picture
of a divided movement.
I highlighted the roles of the
various groups and felt that in the long run the best possible solution was to
have one group communicating one voice.
This was so that when some politicians who oppose our objectives seek to
paint an image of the Chagossian cause being characterised by several groups,
with different objectives (even when there was uniform consensus across so many
critical areas), this could be avoided. A significant weapon utilised by
opponents of campaigners for the cause would be removed at a stroke.
The best solution is to have
one group: the Chagos Refugees Group, with one leader, who handles the
negotiations with the relevant parties at that level. When you have
multiple groups with multiple leaders, even if there is a consensus in some
areas, it still creates a messy picture. And critically it is seized upon
by the Foreign Office who will exploit any conflicting voices, especially if
they can find ones which reinforce its own hideous agenda. Like the old
DGS (which I think Sabrina tells me is as good as gone now) who thanks to
saying things that David Milliband wanted to hear, held a dubious election
where Allen Vincatassin was anointed the official honour of being the
President in waiting of the Chagos Islands. This despite the fact that he
led a group whose number of supporters were spectacularly dwarfed by the
numbers affiliated to the CRG and Olivier Bancoult.
Celia recognised the point and
agreed in principle but always maintained that such a proposal would only work
if it had consensus across the board from day one. It had been attempted at various stages over
the years without success which was why we were where we were. Celia and I were always on the same page, it
is something I appreciated early on during our contact and certainly didn't change when I took over editing the newsletter full time in June 2012.
The first year was an
interesting experience for me as I spent most of the time observing and gaining
a greater insight into how business was managed at that level of the
Association. Roch Evenor was the Chair
of the Association and I valued his contribution as a capable pair of hands to
lead the organisation. He was a reliable
individual, but not necessarily someone who could perhaps inspire passion. He lacked the vision of someone like Sabrina
for example.
There was what some might
describe as a negligent ignorance when it came to things like the potential of
social media. But I think this would be
unfair to single out Roch on this. It is
something that I found was universal across the committee, Sabrina aside, a
fact perhaps reflected by the age of the individuals. Even the person who was tasked with managing
the official UKChSA Twitter account, Robert Bain, was somebody who lacked the
dedication to ensure that such a vital apparatus was being utilised to its
maximum capacity. This was the flagship
Twitter account, the focal point for supporters on that particular
platform. There were times when
supporters would even ask my why they should follow the account as it was so
rarely updated anyway. Not just when there
was a quiet time for news related to the cause, but often at times when the
cause was prominently in the media because of a significant development.
It was something which I
believed was hurting the Association, so following discussions with Sabrina, we
approached Robert suggesting that the role of supervising such a vital tool was
perhaps too much for one person. We
offered to help, to share the load as it were.
Our polite offers of
assistance were repeatedly rebuffed.
Eventually enough was
enough. Sabrina and I were very
frustrated at the way in which the Association was almost sleepwalking at
times, particularly during periods when we should be more active than ever in
response to specific developments, courts cases or the publication of
significant articles. As an interim
measure, a brand new Twitter account was born.
Within two months, it was the largest and most active account supporting
the cause.
We decided that in order to
ensure that the Association was best equipped to move forward, progressively, and
to ensure that all tools were being utilised as effectively as possible, new
leadership was urgently required. This
would need to come in the form of annual elections which would take place at
the AGM.
In April 2013 the AGM was held
and Sabrina became the new chair after Roch had been voted off the
committee. The AGM also included the
development that the joint-patron, Philippa Gregory, had stood down in her
capacity as the Press Officer on the committee.
A couple of months later,
something very unusual happened. With no
election or extraordinary AGM, Philippa Gregory became the co-Vice Chair of the
Association, with the other co-Vice Chair being Marcus Booth who had been voted
into his role at the AGM in April 2013.
This had followed an even more bizarre sequence of events in which it
had initially been suggested for Philippa to be the vice-Chair!
Sabrina rightly rejected the
proposal out of hand, but collectively as an Association we should have
scrutinised this unusual course of events.
However, Philippa’s explanation that she had only wanted a “title to
speak to the press” was taken at face value, although why she could not
re-assume her previous role as the Press Officer is again something of a
mystery.
Around the same time a new
organisation was set up, which was being spearheaded by the same Philippa
Gregory. This new group was called “The
Alliance”, but unfortunately the group was claiming to be something that it wasn't. It was projecting itself as the
unified voice of the Chagossian community, when it lacked the endorsement of
the leader of the biggest group of Chagossians in the world: the Chagos
Refugees Group (CRG) led by Olivier Bancoult.
In short, this was a faction making bogus claims which were unfounded
and claimed to speak on behalf of everyone despite lacking the fundamental
cross-group consensus to proclaim such bold boasts.
“The Alliance” had credible
objectives, but the way it had been established amounted to something that was
being imposed upon the will of the CRG as opposed to seeking their engagement
and consensus from day one. As I pointed
out earlier: the principle of having a unified voice, speaking as one and
communicating or negotiating with Foreign Office officials, is a fantastic
concept. It is something that all
supporters should be working towards.
However it can only work if you have that crucial consensus from the
very beginning. Without consensus you do
not have the authority to claim to speak on behalf of the community as a whole
and in doing so you are essentially making bogus assertions. I would actually go even further and suggest
that the boasts deriving from the leadership of the new group amounted to
conduct that would be described as fraudulent.
Sabrina and I took the view
early on that we would not support the work of this new faction. The sole
purpose of this organisation was to drive a wedge between Chagossians in the UK
and Chagossians based elsewhere, mainly in Mauritius and Seychelles. The
logic being that if you undermine the influence of Olivier, you effectively
weaken his position.
Sabrina and I did not like
what was going on, there were occasions when the Alliance were requesting funds
from the UKChSA and we always made the point of voting against the
proposal. This came to a head at the
turn of the year when Hengride Permal (by now a key member of the fledgling
breakaway “Alliance” faction) the UKChSA assistant secretary, engaged in some
entirely unsavoury and unacceptable behaviour during a series of abusive
emails, beginning with an attack on my predecessor Celia. When I made
it clear that such language was unacceptable, especially when referring to
somebody who had dedicated so much time to the cause, Hengride redirected her
anger towards me.
It is true that Sabrina and I
did consider carefully whether the best course of action would be to stand down
from the Association in protest at the appalling conduct of not just Hengride,
but the silent endorsement of other committee members like Philippa, Marcus and
Bernadette Dugasse. However we decided
that we would stay on, a new AGM was on the horizon and the opportunity would
be available to air such issues and conduct elections to see if such senior committee members
should remain in their roles.
In January 2014, emails were
sent out suggesting dates for the 2014 staging of the AGM. As with normal protocol, the information was
circulated and committee members voted on the relevant dates offered. Five of the nine committee members indicated
that Sunday 6th April would be a suitable date for the hosting of
the AGM. In accordance with all normal UKChSA committee business, the decision
was noted and the date was subsequently communicated to all supporters in the
January edition of the newsletter. This
notice was then reposted in the February and March editions of the newsletter,
the latter being just a week before the AGM date.
24 hours before the AGM, by
which time many supporters had already committed travel plans to be in London
the following day including one who was travelling down from Durham, Marcus and
Philippa took objection to the staging of the AGM. They alleged that protocol had not been
observed, that the AGM had never been properly consulted nor called. They decreed that the AGM taking place the
following day amounted to an illegal gathering and Marcus even went as far as
to suggest that legal challenges would ensue.
Following lengthy
conversations, and checking over emails and newsletters, Sabrina and I were
confident that we had adhered to the correct procedures and that the AGM would
take place on the 6th April as advertised. We were confident that we had followed the
correct procedures, that the required number of votes had been cast to validate
the announcement and that sufficient notice had been communicated. At one stage Marcus even went as far as to suggest
that the notification of the AGM in the newsletter was “irrelevant”, which as I
highlighted at the time, almost brought into question the purpose of the
newsletter altogether. Why was a
newsletter being produced if senior members of the committee (the vice-Chair no less!) were not
even bothering to keep up to date with the news?
On Sunday 6th April we hosted
our AGM, a meeting which was attended by five of the nine members of the
existing committee. This included the Chair, the Treasurer and the Secretary.
The meeting agreed that the re-election of the new committee would take
place by email and that the April edition of the newsletter would confirm all
of this along with the report from the AGM which was circulated shortly after
the meeting.
As usual I carried on as
normal, so on the 18th April I started preparing the April edition of the
newsletter as was my monthly routine. And just like any other month I
finished my draft and sent it over to the same people who checked the monthly
editions of the newsletter. So it went to Celia, George Beckham, David
Snoxell- all fine and all approved.
Just before it was about to go
to Sabrina for the final check, I got an email from Celia.
Celia said she had concerns
over the future of the treasurer of the UKChSA and was worried that the role
may go to a Chagossian (potentially limited by literacy/numeracy skills) or
someone else who was under-equipped to manage the role. I explained to
Celia that Sabrina and I had spoken about this ahead of April 6th and agreed
with the point because we shared a similar view. Such an important role
needed someone of a level of experience. This is why Sabrina and I agreed that we would support and actively
encourage supporters to vote for Perri to return as Treasurer. Perri of
course was one of the committee members who also attended the AGM on the 6th
April. I duly confirmed all of this to
Celia in an email
Despite this email, later that
day Celia then wrote effectively the same email she had written to me earlier,
repeating exactly the same concerns, only this time she copied in everyone on
the existing committee. In addition she made the completely irresponsible
suggestion that the agreed proposal from the AGM to host the elections for the
new committee via email should be abandoned. This would be
replaced by a new proposal which was that the existing committee be retained
for a further twelve months. With no elections.
Celia had known about the
tensions leading up to the AGM- that we needed a new committee, that the
existing committee had broken down, that procedures weren't being followed,
that some committee members were openly abusing other committee members in a
completely discourteous and inappropriate manner. She knew that Sabrina,
Gianny, Paul and myself would not stay on the existing committee without new
elections.
Needless to say Celia's
proposal for retaining the existing committee was endorsed and supported by
five of the nine members of the existing committee. Sabrina, Gianny, Paul
and I were outvoted and could basically stay, or go.
That was the end of April.
I had a full and frank exchange with Celia by email in which I outlined
everything, right back to the fact that the only reason Hengride and I fell out
in the first place back in January this year was because she had been insulting
Celia in the emails. My view at the time was that there was no way I would let anybody question
Celia's commitment or the amount of time she has dedicated to the cause over
the years. Celia did say that she wished she could turn the clock back,
but to be honest, this was empty rhetoric. Celia is someone I kept
completely in the loop- always. If I had kept Celia in the dark ahead of
the AGM in terms of how Sabrina and I felt, our frustrations, the fact we
wanted to see changes, then of course her response and ignorance would have
been understandable. But in this instance it simply didn't wash.
She knew why Sabrina and I couldn't work with the existing committee, and
she knew that the four of us would walk away.
Following a number of
discussions with Sabrina, it was decided that I would not publish the April
edition which now had this new adopted proposal about retaining the existing
committee for another year. I wanted to resign immediately but Sabrina
wanted me to wait as she had been in contact with Olivier, and he was coming to
the UK soon (initially predicted to be in mid-May) and we would have an opportunity to plan our next move. Unfortunately Olivier's mum was suddenly taken ill, I understand Sabrina also mentioned that his uncle passed away too, so naturally he won't be
coming to the UK anytime in the near future.
We was just hanging on, hoping
something would change and that Olivier would arrive, but as you all saw last month
that all changed and the newsletter was published, despite the fact that I had
never officially tendered my resignation. In fact my intentions had only
been communicated to Sabrina and Celia. But in reality it was all a
technicality, there was no possibility that we could stay after what had
happened. Another interesting
development was that the newsletter was then published without being sent to
Sabrina prior to release. It was always
the convention that the Chair of the Association would be the last person to
view the newsletter before it was sent to supporters and campaigners.
Sabrina protested at the fact
that newsletter was now being published by Steffan Donelly before she had an
opportunity to approve its contents.
These concerns were apparently acknowledged when Steffan replied to
Sabrina, however another edition was released again recently and again Sabrina
had not been consulted prior to publication.
When Sabrina communicated these concerns to Celia, Celia proceeded to
spout the most baseless lies. She claimed that the procedure had always been to
send the newsletter to David Snoxell prior to publication and that it was never
sent to anyone else as part of the preview process.
Sabrina knew immediately that this
was untrue. Indeed I still have the
proof in my emails that during my tenure as newsletter Editor, the draft was
always sent to the same individuals prior to publication. The newsletter would go to Celia first, then
to George Beckham, it would then be reviewed by David Snoxell before the Chair
of the Association would have an opportunity to review its contents prior to being released to all of the supporters. Celia’s suggestion that this was not the
case made Sabrina and I furious. This
was not simply a mistake, or an error or an oversight- this was a downright
lie! Celia knew this was a lie too and this
was the final and definitive proof if ever was needed that people who we were
once thought were decent and honourable individuals were now having their
integrity rightly questioned.
When Sabrina showed me the
latest emails with Celia last night, she agreed that the time had come for us
to tell everyone about what was happening.
We realised that by going down this route, we were absolutely crossing
the point of no return. But as Sabrina
explicitly stated to me last night: our time at the UKChSA was now at an
end. The time had come for supporters to
know exactly what has been going on, which is why this post has been circulated
to as many supporters as possible.
While our time with the Association
has come to an end, there are still big questions that must be asked. And
it is no exaggeration to say that if the UKChSA was an official charity, I would be
submitting these questions to the Charities Commission as my belief is that the
UKChSA as an organisation is not fit for purpose.
Questions such as what did
happen to the money that was given to Hengride Permal? This money was
given to her on the basis that it was for a football team. But Sabrina
helped to set up a football team, which she attained funds for, which she
presented receipts for, and a team which was subsequently officially registered
with the global umbrella body for non-FIFA affiliated nations, CONIFA. They have played matches, they
have a campaign being championed by David Vine which many of you would have
seen already on the social networks. This is all legitimate.
So what happened to the team
that Hengride set up? So far there has never been one receipt, not one
football match, not even a kick about with jumpers for goalposts. The
only thing that happened is that the money was sent to Hengride. Where it
went afterwards, is anyone's guess. And I have the emails myself from
Perri asking again: where are the receipts?
If this money cannot be
accounted for then surely is that not a matter for the police? This is
money which has been donated from supporters, supporters who think they are
supporting the plight of Chagossians.
There are further questions
which must be answered about the nature of the relationship between the unelected
Patron Philippa Gregory (who somehow ended up back on the committee with no
election) and Mark Gonzalez, who has to date been the subject of payments of
thousands of pounds for some kind of workshop which as yet nobody can yet
quantify why such a large outlay was made for an organisation with such limited
funding. Funding which then is subsequently denied to completely
deserving applications like people wanting to return to Mauritius to attend the
funeral of a Chagossian relative for example.
During the financial year of 2013/14, Mark Gonzales was the recipient of
a total of £2380 from an organisation (UKChSA) that in the same year only
banked £3056. Almost 80% of the UKChSA’s budget was given to Gonzales, £2000
for workshops and £380 for expenses.
This must be investigated as it is completely unacceptable that such a
vast outlay can be committed to an individual project when other, and possibly more worthy, applications were turned down as a result.
We now have decisions to make
in terms of how we move forward. Clearly the most obvious choice would be to
bolster up the UKCRG, turn it into a UKChSA and take it from there. And
let me be clear that I don't doubt for a moment we could make it absolutely
fantastic and do a lot of good work through that structure.
But I do have grave concerns
about that proposal and this is mainly because it undermines that fundamental
principle for me personally about not wanting to add to the problem.
Starting a new group is not great when it all it does is add another
element to the mix which in turn becomes another opportunity for the Foreign
Office to exploit.
I am absolutely gutted on a
personal level how this has all turned out. UKChSA was such a special organisation
for me, it’s heartbreaking to see what is happening now. I would not know
a single one of you at all if it was not for Celia, so this has completely
knocked me for six. But we had to
communicate this post to every single supporter possible, and allow themselves
as individuals to decide if they would continue to support an organisation
which has such huge questions over the way in which it is being managed.
