 One might conclude from his analysis that full compliance with the rule of law is an unrealistic demand to place on the international legal order, ignoring, as it does, salient disanalogies between the domestic and international spheres, such as the absence of a centralized legislative authority, courts with compulsory jurisdiction, and effective enforcement mechanisms, as well as forms of international solidarity needed to make democratic governance feasible. Crawford himself draws the conclusion that there can only be a rule of law in international law in the thin, formal, sense (Crawford 2014: 375), not the full, substantive, sense incorporating all five of his requirements. (For more optimistic proponents of “thick” conceptions of the international rule of law, one that incorporates respect for human rights, see McCorquodale 2016 and Pavel 2021).