Timothy McDonald reported this story on Thursday, August 16, 2012 12:20:00

ELEANOR HALL: Experts in law and diplomacy say that if the British government were to storm Ecuador's embassy it would be an extraordinary move.



And they say it could set a very dangerous precedent.



Timothy McDonald has more.



TIMOTHY MCDONALD: Most countries are fiercely protective of their embassies.



And often they have the right to be, because international law is squarely on their side.



Geoffrey Robertson, who's an advisor to Julian Assange's legal team, says the British government has no right to enter Ecuado's embassy.



GEOFFREY ROBERTSON: It's very clear from the Vienna Convention and indeed from our own Diplomatic Privileges Act from 1964 that the diplomatic premises and consular premises are what we call inviolable.



And the local police can only enter them with the consent of the head of the mission.



TIMOTHY MCDONALD: But there's a piece of legislation in the UK which casts things in a slightly different light.



It was enacted after shots were fired from the Libyan People's Bureau in Central London in the 1980s.



(sound of people chanting and shots being fired)



(excerpt from news report): A sharp, sudden burst of sub-machine gun fire broke through the chants of the demonstrators. A young woman constable lay dying from wounds to the stomach and alongside her, ten Libyan students wounded from the brief burst of gunfire.



TIMOTHY MCDONALD: Under the Diplomatic and Consular Premises Act 1987, if an embassy is being misused, the British Government can revoke its status, including its right to inviolability.



A widely circulated document reportedly from the British government to the Ecuadorian embassy says they feel the premises is being misused, and they could take action under the Act.



Don Rothwell is a Professor of International Law from the Australian National University.



DON ROTHWELL: So it does apply in very extreme circumstances where that immunity can be revoked, but we've hardly seen that the situation of Mr Assange does reach that level.



TIMOTHY MCDONALD: Does it make it clear within the legislation that a very high bar, I guess, threat to life and limb would have to be at stake for this process to come into effect?



DON ROTHWELL: Well the legislation refers to considerations of national security but the other grounds wouldn't seem to have any relevance. So national security is clearly a fairly high threat, it would clearly be associated with terrorist related type incidents.



But once again, Mr Assange's situation does not seem to have reached that level.



TIMOTHY MCDONALD: What's more, he says it's unlikely this domestic legislation would trump an international agreement if the matter ever came before an international court.



Others suggest that there could be repercussions outside any courtroom, and they might not be limited to the UK.



Michael McKinley is a senior lecturer in International Relations and Strategy at ANU.



MICHAEL MCKINLEY: That would be a radical step in diplomatic history. And it would rebound very, very negatively, not only on Britain but I think on most of the Western nations.



TIMOTHY MCDONALD: If the British were to go ahead and go into the Ecuadorian embassy, would it potentially make it open slather for, I guess, other nations, other countries to try the same.



MICHAEL MCKINLEY: There would only every be a small number of nations or actors in some countries that would try it. But nevertheless there would be this sort of rationale put forward that if it's good enough for the British to do it, then it's good enough for somebody else.



It would be an excuse even then, but nevertheless it would have some currency.



TIMOTHY MCDONALD: Of course, Julian Assange is not a diplomat. And even if he is granted asylum he still has to make it out of the country.



Don Rothwell says it could make for an interesting drive to the airport.



DON ROTHWELL: If Mr Assange was within an embassy car he would not be able to enjoy any levels of protection because embassy vehicles are not inviolable from being stopped by the UK police.



Diplomats inside that car would enjoy protections but Mr Assange would not under UK law. And increasingly, as a result of the events of the last 24 hours, it would seem that the United Kingdom would not be prepared to grant any safe passage for Mr Assange.



ELEANOR HALL: That's international law professor Don Rothwell from the ANU ending Timothy McDonald's report.