Abstract

This article examines recent developments in judicial review of South Africa’s treatymaking powers. It analyses court decisions that have expanded the procedural and substantive review of the executive’s authority to enter into and withdraw from treaties. The article argues that while these developments aim to enhance accountability, they risk intruding on the executive’s foreign affairs discretion and creating conflicts between domestic and international obligations. Drawing on comparative practice, it proposes refinements to limit standing, timing of review, and standards of scrutiny. The article concludes that clearer constitutional delineation of treaty powers may be needed to balance democratic accountability, rights protection, and effective foreign policy conduct.