Afghanistan, some international community members are more preoccupied withverbally condemning it instead of openly criticizing such actions [ CITATION Abd18 \l1033 ]. Apart from this, the lack of compulsory jurisdiction has been playing a great role inmaking international law be perceived as weak law. As per Article 36 of the statue
~ 2 ~regarding jurisdiction of Court, the fundamental principle on which the jurisdiction of theInternational Court of Justice (ICJ) is based on the concept of ‘consent’. This refrainsthe ICJ from imposing any compulsory jurisdiction on any of the states rather stateshave the right to either consent to it or not The ICJ is not authorized to take cases ofevery state and the cases can be filed in this court if both the party states consent to thecase being filed at ICJ [ CITATION Int20 \l 1033 ]. The debate does not end here. Uncertainty in International law has also been thereason for the perception of some scholars; perception that the international law isweak. The law has been called uncertain because several laws and provisions of thislaw are vague and debatable. International law is said to be as a contradictory andvague mass of norms and agreements, offering fewer guidelines. Since 1945 more than40,000 international conventions, agreements and treaties had been signed globally. Toexpect that all of these agreements will be perfectly consistent with one another israther unrealistic and impractical. This lack of consistency sometimes makes it verydifficult to even know what a nation’s treaty obligations are. Contradictory and vaguelaws create dilemmas for even the disinterested observer. For those with a vestedinterest, there is much room for self-serving uses (or abuses) of international law[ CITATION Ege13 \l 1033 ]. Apart from all this evidence given to support the idea that international law is weak,many states mostly obey and comply with international law. Even though the UNCharter does not permit violating sovereignty through the use of aggression, the extentto which states follow their international obligations varies. However, Louis Henkinstates that “Almost all nations observe almost all principles of international law andalmost all of their obligations almost all the time”. Henkin, Louis (1979) How NationsBehave, New York, Columbia University Press [ CITATION Hea141 \l 1033 ]. Also, it hadbeen viewed that many states conform to the regulations of international law withconsent as it serves their self-interest. Moreover, if the state consent to theimplementation of any international law, the enforcement will be effective and strict asthe laws will be respected like any domestic law [ CITATION GLa00 \l 1033 ]. Conclusively, it can be said that international law is based on shaky grounds due to theconcept of consent to abide by its regulations and vagueness and uncertainty in variouslaws. Moreover, the enforcement of international laws is not as strict as domestic lawswhich makes it a voluntarily-implemented legislature. Such evidence makes theargument incline towards the scholars’ view that international law is weak and unstable.