Muizzu Administration Withholds UK Response on Chagos Letter

President Muizzu’s administration, which assumed office promising full transparency, has refused to disclose the response received from the United Kingdom regarding the Chagos Archipelago dispute.

Under the Right to Information Act, RaajjeTV has submitted a request to the President's Office seeking clarification on whether the Maldivian government has received a response to the letter sent to the United Kingdom regarding the Chagos Islands issue. The news outlet further requested details of the response, should one have been provided.

In his presidential address at the opening of the People's Majlis for the current year, President Muizzu addressed the United Kingdom's decision to grant sovereignty of Chagos to Mauritius. He stated that the Maldivian government has formally submitted written objections to the UK government on November 8, 2024, and January 18, 2026, expressing the state's opposition to the decision. Furthermore, President Muizzu noted that during a telephone conversation with the UK Deputy Prime Minister, David Lammy, on December 15, 2025, he reiterated the Maldivian government's desire to engage in further discussions with the British government regarding this matter.

Since then, the government has failed to clarify to the public whether the United Kingdom has issued any official response regarding the matter.

In a written response to RaajjeTV, the President's Office stated that the information "cannot be disclosed," citing Article 20 of the Act.

Article 20 of the Act outlines the prioritization of public interest and the specific circumstances for exemptions. It appears the President’s Office has decided to withhold this information by citing provisions of the law that allow for non-disclosure if it is deemed detrimental to the public interest. However, the response from the President’s Office failed to clarify exactly which public interest would be compromised by the release of this information.

Despite the President's Office's refusal to disclose this information, during a campaign rally in L. Gan on September 25, 2023, ahead of the presidential runoff, Muizzu pledged that he was not seeking office to conduct state affairs in secrecy. He assured the public that his administration would operate with full transparency and that no individual in a government position would be exempt from public accountability.

"There will be no secrets kept within any government office. We will not allow a situation where information is withheld from the public or the media. If actions are hidden from the people, there can be no stability."

Dr. Mohamed Muizzu

During the gathering, Muizzu heavily criticized the administration of the time. Accusing the government of operating under a veil of secrecy, Muizzu stated that the situation had deteriorated to the point where citizens were forced to seek recourse through the Supreme Court just to obtain information regarding state loans. He further noted that details concerning the bridge agreement and even basic data on food commodity imports had become inaccessible to the public.

Furthermore, while speaking at the closing of the Small Island Developing States (SIDS) Supreme Audit Institutions Symposium and the opening of the INTOSAI Development Initiative Global Summit held in Ukulhas on August 5, President Muizzu emphasized the necessity of collective and sincere efforts rooted in integrity, accountability, and transparency to ensure robust democracies for future generations.

Observers have noted numerous discrepancies between President Muizzu’s rhetoric as Head of Government and his administration's subsequent actions. A prominent example is the dispute over the maritime boundary between the Maldives and Chagos at the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea (ITLOS). During that period, the PPM-PNC coalition—which then included President Muizzu—vehemently criticized the previous administration, alleging that a letter sent by President Solih to the Prime Minister of Mauritius had resulted in the loss of Maldivian territory. At the time, the coalition repeatedly demanded the public disclosure of that letter.