Whether the legality principle attracts a duty to constitutional framework reforms is contested. In this article, I aim to contribute to the development of a deferential approach to deference, requiring the courts to respect executive decision-making. I grapple with the distinction between procedural fairness as a requirement for PAJA and procedural requirements for legality. Beyond the procedural requirements for legality, my approach of engagement is based on judicial overreach in the terrain of the executive sphere. The fertile ground is to encourage judicial restraint and constitutional framework reforms. The article finally demonstrates executive decision and legislative function in the case and argues that they can be further developed through constitutional reforms.