Comparison

Read two legal systems against each other

Because every portal follows the same fifteen-section outline, the comparison is genuinely like-for-like rather than a collage of whatever each government happens to publish.

Select up to six documented jurisdictions

Clear selection

Afghanistan Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bhutan Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Brazil Brunei Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Central African Republic Chad Chile China Colombia Comoros Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Cyprus Czechia DR Congo Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Eswatini Ethiopia Fiji Finland France Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Holy See (Vatican City)Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Ivory Coast Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Laos Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Marshall Islands Mauritania Mauritius Mexico Micronesia Moldova Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria North Korea North Macedonia Norway Oman Pakistan Palau Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Qatar Republic of the Congo Romania Russia Rwanda Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Korea South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Sweden Switzerland Syria São Tomé and Príncipe Tajikistan Tanzania Thailand The Bahamas Timor-Leste Togo Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela Vietnam Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe

Comparison of selected legal systems
Attribute	BruneiReviewed	NauruReviewed	UgandaReviewed
Legal family	Mixed common law and Islamic law	Common law with customary law	Mixed (common law and customary law)
System of government	Absolute monarchy	Parliamentary republic	Unitary presidential republic
Constitution	Constitution of Brunei Darussalam	Constitution of Nauru	Constitution of the Republic of Uganda
In force since	1959	1968	1995
Capital	Bandar Seri Begawan	Yaren (seat of government)	Kampala
Official languages	Malay, English	Nauruan, English	English, Swahili, Luganda
Currency	Brunei dollar (BND)	Australian dollar (AUD)	Ugandan Shilling (UGX)
Population	450,000	12,500	48,600,000
Division of powers	Unitary, with four districts administered by district officers reporting to the Ministry of Home Affairs. No federal or devolved tier; village and mukim headmen have recognised consultative functions.	Unitary and highly centralised — Nauru has no second tier of general government. The Nauru Island Council was abolished in 1999, so the state deals directly with citizens, though the 14 districts remain the basis for parliamentary constituencies and the twelve tribes retain social significance in land and title questions.	Presidential system with a Prime Minister, a unicameral Parliament, and a judiciary in which the Supreme Court, Court of Appeal (sitting also as the Constitutional Court) and High Court form the superior courts.
How law is made	In form, bills are introduced in the Legislative Council and assented to by the Sultan. In practice the significant instruments are Orders made by the Sultan under the emergency proclamation, which take effect on publication in the Government Gazette without Council passage. The Syariah Penal Code Order 2013 was enacted this way.	Bills receive three readings in the 19-member chamber and are assented to by the President. Ordinary legislation needs a simple majority, but the entrenched provisions of Part XI require a two-thirds majority and, for the most protected articles, approval at a referendum — the barrier that defeated the 2010 reform proposals.	Bills receive three readings with committee scrutiny; certificates of financial implication are required for money bills. The President assents, returns the bill twice with recommendations, or it becomes law if passed a third time by two-thirds.
Legal profession	Advocates and solicitors are admitted by the High Court under the Legal Profession Act, generally after qualifying in England, Malaysia, Singapore or Australia and completing local requirements. The profession is small — a few hundred practitioners — and foreign counsel may be admitted ad hoc for particular cases. Syariah practice is a separate track: Syariah lawyers are certified under the Syariah Courts Act and appear only in the Syariah hierarchy, so a matter that crosses both systems needs two sets of representation.	A very small fused profession admitted by the Supreme Court under the Legal Practitioners Act 1973, supplemented by pleaders — non-lawyers licensed to appear in the District Court and before the Lands Committee, a practical necessity given the number of resident lawyers. Judicial officers are frequently appointed from Australia, New Zealand or elsewhere in the Pacific.	Fused; an LLB, the Law Development Centre post-graduate diploma and enrolment admit an advocate. The Uganda Law Society is the professional body.

A comparison table flattens nuance by design. Where a difference matters to a decision you are making, open both portals and read the section in full — the constitutional detail behind a one-line summary is often the part that governs the outcome.