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	ParaguayReviewed	UruguayReviewed	MicronesiaReviewed	BurundiIndexed
Legal family	Civil law	Civil law	Mixed common law with customary law	Civil law (Belgian tradition)
System of government	Unitary presidential republic	Unitary presidential republic	Federal republic in free association with the United States	Unitary presidential republic
Constitution	Constitution of the Republic of Paraguay	Constitution of the Oriental Republic of Uruguay	Constitution of the Federated States of Micronesia	Constitution of the Republic of Burundi
In force since	1992	1967	1979	2018
Capital	Asunción	Montevideo	Palikir	Gitega
Official languages	Spanish, Guaraní	Spanish	English, Chuukese, Pohnpeian, Yapese, Kosraean	Kirundi, French, English
Currency	Paraguayan guaraní (PYG)	Uruguayan peso (UYU)	United States dollar (USD)	Burundian Franc (BIF)
Population	6,900,000	3,400,000	115,000	13,200,000
Division of powers	Unitary with seventeen departments and the capital district, each with an elected governor and departmental board holding administrative and limited fiscal competence. Legislative power is national.	Unitary. Nineteen departments have elected intendentes and juntas with administrative and local taxing competence, and municipalities were added in 2010, but all legislative power belongs to the General Assembly.	Genuine federalism. The national government holds foreign affairs, defence, immigration, currency and interstate commerce; everything else, including land tenure, is state or local. Each state has its own constitution and supreme court, and Yap's constitution creates Councils of Pilung and Tamol — traditional leaders' councils with power to disapprove state legislation affecting tradition and custom.	Presidential system with a Prime Minister, a bicameral Parliament of National Assembly and Senate with ethnic and gender quotas, and a judiciary headed by the Supreme Court with a separate Constitutional Court.
How law is made	Bills may start in either chamber and must pass both. The President may object in whole or part; Congress overcomes an objection by absolute majority in both chambers. Constitutional amendment requires a two-thirds vote of each chamber and ratification by referendum; wholesale reform requires a constituent assembly.	Bills pass both chambers; disagreement is resolved by the General Assembly sitting jointly. The executive may veto, overcome by three-fifths of the joint assembly. Distinctively, 25% of registered voters can force a referendum to repeal a statute within one year of promulgation, and 10% can initiate a constitutional plebiscite.	Bills pass Congress and are signed by the President, who has a veto that Congress may override. Because the four at-large senators serve longer terms and are the pool from which the President is drawn, national politics is structured around balancing the states rather than around parties — there are no formal political parties. Constitutional amendments may be proposed by Congress, by a convention, or by popular initiative, and require ratification by three-quarters of the voters in three of the four states.	Bills are examined in committee and plenary in both chambers; certain organic laws require reinforced majorities reflecting the ethnic balance provisions. The President promulgates.
Legal profession	A law degree and registration of the title with the Supreme Court, which maintains the roll and exercises discipline. Bar membership is voluntary. Because both Spanish and Guaraní are official, courts must provide interpretation, and practitioners outside Asunción are commonly bilingual.	A degree from the Universidad de la República or an accredited private faculty confers the title of abogado, with registration by the Supreme Court. Membership of the Colegio de Abogados del Uruguay is voluntary; the Supreme Court exercises discipline. Escribanos públicos are a separate profession with exclusive competence over conveyancing.	Admission is to the FSM Supreme Court, with rules that recognise foreign qualifications, so many practitioners trained in the United States. A distinctive feature is the trial counselor: a non-lawyer licensed to appear in certain courts after examination, which is how most representation is delivered outside the main centres. Practitioners must often hold admission both nationally and in the relevant state.	Avocats admitted through the Ordre des avocats du Burundi after a law degree and traineeship; the profession is concentrated in Bujumbura.

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.