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	South SudanIndexed	United StatesReviewed
Legal family	Common law with customary law	Common law
System of government	Transitional government of national unity	Federal presidential constitutional republic
Constitution	Transitional Constitution of the Republic of South Sudan	Constitution of the United States
In force since	2011	1789
Capital	Juba	Washington, D.C.
Official languages	English, Arabic, Dinka, Nuer	English, Spanish
Currency	South Sudanese pound (SSP)	US Dollar (USD)
Population	11,100,000	335,000,000
Division of powers	Decentralised in form, with states and administrative areas whose number has changed repeatedly — from ten at independence to twenty-eight, then thirty-two, and back to ten plus administrative areas under the 2018 agreement. Local government includes county and payam tiers and statutory customary authorities.	Strict separation between Congress, the President and the federal judiciary, checked by veto, impeachment, advice-and-consent over appointments, and judicial review established in Marbury v. Madison (1803).
How law is made	Bills are introduced by ministers or members, considered in committee and passed by the Transitional National Legislative Assembly, with the Council of States participating on matters affecting the states. The President assents. Because the legislature is constituted by power-sharing quota rather than election, and because several key bills including the permanent constitutional process have stalled, the process is transitional rather than settled.	A bill is introduced in either chamber, referred to committee, reported, debated and voted. It must pass both chambers in identical text, then be signed by the President or survive a veto by a two-thirds vote in each chamber.
Legal profession	Advocates are admitted through the Ministry of Justice and represented by the South Sudan Bar Association, and the profession is small relative to need, with many practitioners trained in Uganda, Kenya or Sudan. Judicial numbers are low and vacancies persistent, which is a large part of why customary courts carry most of the dispute-resolution load.	Admission is state-by-state: an accredited JD, a state bar examination, and a character and fitness review. There is no split between barristers and solicitors.

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.