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	United StatesReviewed	FranceReviewed	JapanReviewed	ChinaReviewed
Legal family	Common law	Civil law	Civil law with common-law influence	Socialist civil law
System of government	Federal presidential constitutional republic	Unitary semi-presidential republic	Unitary parliamentary constitutional monarchy	Socialist one-party republic
Constitution	Constitution of the United States	Constitution of the Fifth Republic	Constitution of Japan	Constitution of the People's Republic of China
In force since	1789	1958	1947	1982
Capital	Washington, D.C.	Paris	Tokyo	Beijing
Official languages	English, Spanish	French	Japanese	Standard Chinese (Putonghua)
Currency	US Dollar (USD)	Euro (EUR)	Japanese Yen (JPY)	Renminbi (CNY)
Population	335,000,000	68,200,000	123,500,000	1,410,000,000
Division of powers	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).	Semi-presidential: the President holds reserved powers over defence and foreign affairs; the Government answers to Parliament. The Conseil constitutionnel reviews statutes before promulgation and, since 2008, on referral from litigation.	Parliamentary government with the Cabinet collectively responsible to the Diet, and a Supreme Court holding the final power of constitutional review.	Unitary, with a highly asymmetric structure: 23 provinces, five autonomous regions, four directly administered municipalities and two special administrative regions. Hong Kong and Macao operate under 'one country, two systems' with their own Basic Laws, their own courts of final appeal, and legal systems that remain common-law and Portuguese-derived civil-law respectively. Provincial people's congresses may enact local regulations that must not contravene national law.
How law is made	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.	A projet or proposition de loi shuttles between the chambers; the Assembly can be given the last word. Organic laws and constitutional amendments follow stricter routes.	Most bills are Cabinet-sponsored, drafted by ministries and reviewed by the Cabinet Legislation Bureau, then passed by both houses; the lower house can override the upper by a two-thirds majority.	The NPC meets in plenary once a year, so the Standing Committee enacts most legislation. A bill is normally read three times under the Legislation Law, with drafts published for public comment — the Civil Code drafts drew over a million submissions. The NPCSC also has power to interpret laws, which it exercises as a substantive lawmaking tool. There is no presidential veto: the President promulgates what the NPC or its Standing Committee has passed.
Legal profession	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.	Avocats qualify through a CRFPA examination and the CAPA. Notaires, huissiers and avocats aux Conseils are separate regulated professions.	Candidates pass the national bar examination, then complete a year at the Legal Training and Research Institute before qualifying as bengoshi, judge or prosecutor.	Lawyers are licensed under the Lawyers Law after passing the National Unified Legal Profession Qualification Examination, which since 2018 has also been the common entry route for judges, prosecutors and notaries. Firms are licensed and subject to annual inspection by provincial justice departments, and membership of the All China Lawyers Association is mandatory. A 2012 amendment to the Lawyers Law requires an oath that includes loyalty to the leadership of the Communist Party, and the annual licence renewal is the principal point of leverage over practitioners in politically sensitive work.

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.