Does Koh clearly define

Name:
Institution Affiliation:
Course:
Date:
Koh clearly explains what compliance is; to them, it is a state in which human beings are in line with what the law has provided for. In basic terms even from the nonprofessional perspective, this is what compliance and should be. It is the state in which people get to go in line with what the law has provided. It does not necessarily mean that the parties have to blindly follow the provisions of the law but rather that they have to follow what has been provided under the law either expressly or even if it is impliedly (Koh, 1998). It must not be word to word as it has been prescribed in the statute, but even in cases where the aspect is close to what the law does expect, then we do assume that such is also compliance as well.
I am of the opinion that there can be no state, which is completely compliant with international law. Severally states look for ways in which they could have international laws go their way, and as a result, they end up assuming one law or the other. One single state cannot be assumed fully compliant with international law. There can be no way, in which we can also say that there is no single law in the country that is contrary to the international laws that the country has ascribed to as well (Koh, 1998). What the people would prefer the most is to have a situation in which the society does get to have laws that are at least similar or reflective of international law. To say that the law is fully compliant with international law will be nothing more than a sham and a complete lie that can be brought up.

References
Koh, H. H. (1998). How is international human rights law enforced. Ind. lJ, 74, 1397.