▁constitution al ▁document , ▁was ▁in app lic able ▁to ▁the ▁Ch ag os ▁Islands . ▁They ▁also ▁maintained ▁that ▁" make ▁laws ▁for ▁the ▁peace , ▁order ▁and ▁good ▁government ▁of ▁the ▁Territ ory " ▁gave ▁the ▁Commission er ▁a ▁wide ▁enough ▁juris diction ▁to ▁account ▁for ▁the ▁order ▁for ci b ly ▁removing ▁the ▁Ch ag os si ans , ▁and ▁that ▁the ▁court ▁could ▁not ▁decide ▁in ▁such ▁a ▁way ▁as ▁to ▁force ▁the ▁government ▁to ▁break ▁its ▁treat y ▁with ▁the ▁United ▁States . ▁ ▁The ▁Div is ional ▁Court ▁gave ▁its ▁judgment ▁on ▁ 3 ▁November ▁ 2 0 0 0 , ▁on ▁three ▁main ▁issues : ▁first ly , ▁the ▁court ' s ▁right ▁to ▁hear ▁the ▁case ; ▁second ly , ▁the ▁Ch ag os si ans ' ▁constitution al ▁right ▁of ▁residence ; ▁and , ▁third ly , ▁the ▁status ▁of ▁the ▁Commission er ' s ▁actions . ▁The ▁court ▁found ▁that ▁it ▁did ▁have ▁dis cret ion ▁to ▁hear ▁the ▁case : ▁while ▁the ▁Crown ▁was ▁divis ible , ▁the ▁actions ▁of ▁the ▁B I OT ▁were ▁clearly ▁the ▁actions ▁of ▁the ▁British ▁government , ▁since ▁every ▁B I OT ▁action ▁was ▁ordered ▁and ▁de alt ▁with ▁by ▁the ▁Foreign ▁and ▁Commonwealth ▁Office . ▁La ws ▁J ▁found ▁that ▁the ▁Mag na ▁Cart a ▁did ▁apply ▁to ▁foreign ▁nations , ▁as ▁it ▁was ▁" the ▁nearest ▁approach ▁to ▁an ▁ir replace able ▁' fund amental ▁stat ute ' ▁that ▁England ▁has ▁ever ▁had  