Features of the demise of the theory of Sovereign Acts in the field of judicial review over Enforcement of international treaties

The theory of Sovereign Acts (acts of state) is a real departure from the principle of legitimacy and the state\u27s submission to the law. The French Council of State invented this theory only to protect its existence and competence from the government\u27s reaction on the eve of the return of the monarchy, it was only to fortify some of its acts from its control and to courtesy the government through its rulings. However, the orientations of the State Council in its early stages have known many transformations, especially in the area of limiting the effects of the implementation of that theory concerning to the application of international treaties so many of the the government\u27s acts, which were recognized as immune to the control of the administrative judiciary, became subject to the latter. This study aims to examine the growing blockade of the government\u27s acts theory in the face of the extension of judicial oversight to include various stages of the application of international treaties, as well as the national judge\u27s adherence to the authority to determine the direct effect of the treaty and its applicability, even after it enters into force. This study argues that thanks to the outstanding jurisprudential development of the French Council of State, under the influence of the European Court of Human Rights, The theory of the government\u27s acts is heading towards demise, in order to ensure the right to a fair trial and an effective appeal. Keywords: legitimacy, immunity, acts, government, sovereignty, treatie