In my reviewing the literary sources, when getting prepared for the analysis on the subject, I have come to the conclusion that the twentieth century itself has displayed enormous progress in the international law, and though treaties at present seem to take the leading place in the instruments and sources of the international law, it finally appears that both custom and treaty are effective, they interrelate, and moreover, treaties appear to be the means of creating new customs in international law. It is yet under question, which of the two sources of the international law is more effective at present, and is it possible that the multilateral treaty becomes more important and reliable for the world community, than the legal custom, according to which this community is accustomed to live
Through the literary sources reviewed, I may assume, that customary and treaty law can't act separately, and are more the means of mutual support, depending on the situation; I may also suggest that both custom and multilateral treaties appear to be the effective vehicles of regulating the international relations in the sphere if law and legislation. Though, in the light of the close interrelation between the custom and the treaty it is at times difficult to decide, which of them appears to work more effectively. Thus, the deep analysis of the present situation is to be performed as follows.
Treaties or custom - what is a more effective vehicle of regulating international law
First of all, it should be noted, that sometimes we point out the universal international consensus on certain issues, as the use of forces between the States or the areas of criminal justice. Can it be stated, that these are the examples of the custom-working international legal system I might accept that these are the examples of the Customary International Law application, shown through the conduct, which the nations display independently from the treaty-based agreements and keep to this conduct as if based on the law or some oral treaty.1 However, it is also important to note, that 'Customary international law is a conceptual structure, which is represented as an assumed or constructed consensus under which those States, that dissent from a precise obligation that may be defined nevertheless agree to be bound because of the supposed collectively representative nature of the decision'.2 Does this mean that custom has broader action in relation to the participating and non-participating parties, and can we thus conclude that ultimately the custom carries greater force than any multilateral treaty
It should be remembered, that international law, which as a system appeared a few centuries ago, and has later become general international law, was initially based on the custom, and not on the treaty. The notions of treaty law have become applicable only later with the processes of globalization and the need to solve these global issues by imposing certain obligatory norms on the States - participants of the treaty-making process. Multilateral treaties thus have become the effective instrument of guaranteeing the fulfillment of the obligations by all participating States. Simultaneously, it should not be forgotten, that multilateral treaties are the means of creating norms for only those States, which become the participants of t