Mauritius won its first victory when the “tribunal constituted under Annex vii of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea” delivered its award “in the matter of the Chagos Marine Protected Area (mpa) Arbitration, between the Republic of Mauritius and the United Kingdom”. The award declared that the mpa established around Chagos by the United Kingdom was against international law. However, the decision desired by both Mauritius and the Chagossians is found in the dissenting opinion, which is, as a matter of law, non-binding. The dissenting opinion is to the effect that the tribunal had jurisdiction to consider the issue of sovereignty over Chagos and that if such issue was considered, Mauritius had a strong case for winning back sovereignty over Chagos. This article aims to make the dissenting opinions more widely known and reflect on the legal value of such opinions, alongside their high political and moral value and relevance to Mauritius and the Chagossians.