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	TanzaniaReviewed	NamibiaReviewed	NauruReviewed	BruneiReviewed
Legal family	Mixed (common law, customary law, Islamic law)	Mixed Roman-Dutch and English common law	Common law with customary law	Mixed common law and Islamic law
System of government	Unitary presidential republic with autonomous Zanzibar	Semi-presidential republic	Parliamentary republic	Absolute monarchy
Constitution	Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania	Constitution of the Republic of Namibia	Constitution of Nauru	Constitution of Brunei Darussalam
In force since	1977	1990	1968	1959
Capital	Dodoma	Windhoek	Yaren (seat of government)	Bandar Seri Begawan
Official languages	Swahili, English	English	Nauruan, English	Malay, English
Currency	Tanzanian Shilling (TZS)	Namibian dollar (NAD)	Australian dollar (AUD)	Brunei dollar (BND)
Population	67,400,000	2,600,000	12,500	450,000
Division of powers	Presidential system with a Prime Minister, a unicameral National Assembly, and a separate Zanzibar government with its own House of Representatives and judiciary up to the Zanzibar High Court.	Unitary with 14 administrative regions and elected regional councils, which also constitute the National Council, the upper chamber. Traditional authorities exercise recognised functions over communal land and customary law.	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.	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.
How law is made	Bills are read three times with committee scrutiny in the National Assembly. Bills affecting Zanzibar's Union interests require particular majorities. The President assents; a returned bill passed again by two-thirds must be assented to or the Assembly dissolved.	Bills pass the National Assembly through three readings, then go to the National Council for review. The Council may confirm, propose amendments, or object; the Assembly can override an objection by a two-thirds majority. The President then assents, and constitutional amendments require two-thirds of both chambers and may never diminish the rights chapter.	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.	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.
Legal profession	Fused; advocates are admitted to the roll of the High Court after an LLB and the Law School of Tanzania, with the Tanganyika Law Society as the mainland professional body.	A fused profession under the Legal Practitioners Act: a single class of legal practitioner is admitted after a law degree and the Justice Training Centre's postgraduate course, and the Law Society of Namibia regulates practice.	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.	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 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.