State H alleges that State G is violating an international customary law. All parties agree that the customary law crystallized in 2004.

G was aware of the State practice involved and placed on the record twenty different objections to the practice between 1998, when the practice first began, and 2002. In 2002, State G enacted domestic legislation consistent with the practice. In 2005, State G invalidated the domestic legislation and began again to record its objections to the practice.

Is G a persistent objector to the customary law?

Yes, because G does meet the persistent objector requirements.

No, because G does not meet the persistent objector requirements.

Yes, because as of 2005, G is articulating the development of a new customary law rule, and the theory of Articulation & Act requires the international community to suspend application of the existing custom until it is known whether other States will act upon G's articulation.