Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T07:42:04.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

An Introduction to International Law. By Mark W. Janis. Boston and Toronto: Little, Brown and Company, 1988. Pp. xvi, 299. Index. $14, paper. - Public International Law in the Modern World. By David H. Ott. London: Pitman Publishing, 1987. Pp. xxi, 390. Index. £14.95, paper. - International Law: A Student Introduction. By Rebecca M. M. Wallace. London: Sweet & Maxwell, 1986. Pp. xxiv, 275. Index. $21.25, paper.

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2017

Lori Fisler Damrosch
Lori Fisler Damrosch*
Affiliation:
Columbia University School of Law
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 83 , Issue 4 , October 1989 , pp. 946 - 949
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of International Law 1989

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 Reviewed at 81 AJIL 449 (1987).

2 First edition reviewed at 65 AJIL 643 (1971).

3 One example will suffice. As this review goes to press, the Chinese dissidents Fang Lizhi and Li Shuxian are being given temporary refuge in the U.S. Embassy in Beijing. The Chinese authorities have condemned the United States for violating the international law of diplomatic relations. See Scheffer, U.S. Embassy Makes a Risky Refuge, Wall St. J., June 13, 1989, at A20, col. 3. How does Ott evaluate such a situation?

General international law does not appear to recognise the giving of asylum as one of the proper duties or functions of a diplomatic mission, and the granting of such asylum may indeed appear an unfriendly act. The way therefore appears open to the host state to claim a right in extreme cases to enter the premises and seize the wanted person [p. 164].

There is no authority for the latter sentence.