As customary international law is basedon the international obligations from the established state practices, rather thaninternational obligations from formally written treaties, customaryinternational law serves as a valuable source of normative pressure within theinternational system. Customary international laws are considered to be the”foundation of the modern law of nations,” because it is the prime source ofinternational law. This means that the laws of states and international legalindividuals impact the terms of a customary international law, that make customlaws a binding law (Nantais, 2018; Wood, 2017). If forced, most statesmay be capable of relying solely on their own resources and laws for survival,therefore, states used to be given the option of declining the privilege andopportunity to partake in a “community under law.
” Due to the common reason forstates’ decline, a principle of international law is that states must consentto a law prior to being legally bound by it. This action is done by customaryinternational law. According to the Ruleof Law Institute of Australia, the International Court of Justice has, however,”ruled that states cannot opt out of customary international law either in fullor in part.” Without an option of opting out, this can make states feel as ifthey are being forced to abide by the norms of the international system. When awidespread treaty is agreed upon, evidence shows that the agreed rules are opiniojuris, which therefore binds all states whether adopting the treaty or not (Wood,2017). (254 words) I disagree with the statement that “CustomaryInternational Law remains an important and necessary source of internationallaw.” Customary laws have many issues, ranging from modernized internationalrelevancy to its consistency. The main issues are the outdated laws that arenot applicable to new states, as they were not involved in the creation of oldcustoms.
Custom International Laws tend to be outdated due to the fact that itis unable to pace itself and address new conditions of the rapidly changingpolitical world. Socialists and the less developed nations have argued the needfor customary laws to be reviewed; the option of relying on customs to controlnew legal situations have been decreasing, since treaties are successfully capableof putting together updated rules. Despite the lack of relevancy to legalmodern-day situations, Customary International Law lacks consistency. When thedecision of a state, observer, or judge concludes that there is an evident normin a custom, another state, observer or judge, however, may not come to thatsame conclusion, hence the fact that evidence of customs are based on subjectiveexamination because of the diversity of states’ behavior (Nantais, 2018). Consistency is an essential aspect of CustomaryInternational Law, as it exposes the principle between states (Dixon, 2013). The development of Customary InternationalLaw can create, instead of preventing conflicts from arising.
Conflicts tend to arise mainly because thereare no compromises between states, as every state differs politically,economically, and ideologically. As one state may intend to create customarylaws, another state may intentionally behave in a way to obstruct theestablishment of that customary law if it conflicts with the views of laws ofthat particular state (Nantais,2018). Customary International Laws are not asbeneficial as portrayed.