Abstract: This research examines the development and application of the theory of separate administrative acts within the framework of administrative judiciary. It highlights how the administrative judiciary, particularly in France, Lebanon, and Iraq, has expanded its oversight by distinguishing between sovereign (governmental) acts and separable administrative actions. Originally introduced to protect administrative authority from judicial interference, the theory has evolved into a critical judicial tool to ensure the rule of law and protect individual rights against arbitrary administrative decisions. The study elaborates on the theoretical foundations of judicial oversight, its implications for the legitimacy principle, and its practical applications across various legal domains such as electoral, tax, war-related, and international administrative acts. Through a comparative legal analysis, the research reveals how courts have narrowed the scope of sovereign acts, recognizing that many administrative actions though rooted in government authority are subject to judicial review when they affect citizens' rights. The work concludes with recommendations for strengthening administrative judicial systems in Iraq to ensure legal clarity, safeguard constitutional rights, and refine the balance between state sovereignty and individual protection.