COMPARATIVE EXAMINATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL TRENDS IN TREATY IMPLEMENTATION IN SOUTH AFRICA AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Abstract

Treaties form the basis of most parts of modern international law. They serve to satisfy a fundamental need of States to regulate by consent issues of common concern, and thus to bring stability into their mutual relations. As an instrument for ensuring stability, reliability and order in international relations, treaties are one of the most important elements of international peace and security. This is why treaties have always been the primary source of legal relations. From the comparative examination of constitutional trends in treaty implementation in South Africa and the United States of America, it is very clear that the importance of treaty is emphasised in the constitutions of the various jurisdictions. From the comparative examination of constitutional trends in treaty implementation in South Africa and the United States of America, it is very clear that the importance of treaty is emphasised in the constitutions of the various jurisdictions. It is recommended that Nigerians should not be denied the benefits of a treaty to which the country is a signatory by domestic courts by reason of strict adherence to technicalities. Therefore, the courts should always consider the importance of international treaties in reaching decisions on areas covered by them as is the case in South Africa. In such situations, preference should always be given to treaty provisions. Some treaties should be treated as self-executing in Nigeria based on their importance as is the case in the United States of America. Treaties protecting human rights should be treated as self-executing.