Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-28T02:10:31.898Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Indian Rights—Human Rights: Handbook for Indians on International Human Rights Complaint Procedures. Washington: Indian Law Resource Center, 1984. Pp. 129. $4.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Robert A. Williams Jr.
Robert A. Williams Jr.*
Affiliation:
University of Wisconsin Law School
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
Image of the first page of this content. For PDF version, please use the ‘Save PDF’ preceeding this image.'
Type
Book Reviews and Notes
Information
American Journal of International Law , Volume 81 , Issue 2 , April 1987 , pp. 490 - 494
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 The literature on natural rights and natural law and its history in Western European thought is extensive. The Political Theory of Possessive Individualism (1962), by C. B. Macpherson, remains one of the finest monographs on the legacy left by Hobbes and Locke to modern political thought. American Interpretations of Natural Law (1931), by B. Wright, and two essays by Habermas, The Classical Doctrine of Politics in Relation to Social Philosophy and Natural Law and Revolution, in Habermas, J., Theory and Practice (1973)Google Scholar, also provide interesting, if somewhat divergent, treatments of the same topic.

2 See generally the varied set of readings contained in Social Change: The Colonial Situation (Wallerstein, I. ed. 1966)Google Scholar on the impact of Western colonization on Third World nations.

3 See generally Barsh, , Indigenous North America and Contemporary International Law 62 Or. L. Rev. 73 (1983)Google Scholar.

4 Johnson & Graham’s Lessee v. Mcintosh, 21 U.S. (8 Wheat.) 543, 573–74 (1823). On the doctrine and its influence in European legal theory and discourse respecting indigenous peoples and their rights, see generally Henderson, , Unravelling the Riddle of Aboriginal Title 5 Am. Indian L. Rev. 75, 87–105 (1977)Google Scholar. See also Barsh, R. & Henderson, J., The Road: Indian Tribes and Political Liberty 49 (1980)Google Scholar.

5 Barsh, supra note 3, at 97.

6 See GA Res. 1541, 15 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 16) at 29, UN Doc. A/4684 (1960). See generally Barsh, supra note 3, at 84–87; G. Bennett, Aboriginal Rights in International Law 12–13 (1978); and Andress & Falkowski, Self-Determinatiim: Indians and the United Nations—The Anomalous Status of America’s Domestic Dependent Nations, 8 Am. Indian L. Rev. 97, 109– 14(1980).

7 Lovelace v. Canada, Communication No. R.6/24 (announced July 30, 1981). See 36 UN GAOR Supp. (No. 40), Ann. XVIII, UN Doc. A/36/40 (1981).