List of national legal systems

Religious law

Religious law refers to the notion of a religious system or document being used as a legal source, though the methodology used varies. For example, the use of Judaism and halakha for public law has a static and unalterable quality, precluding amendment through legislative acts of government or development through judicial precedent; Christian canon law is more similar to civil law in its use of codes; and Islamic sharia law (and fiqh jurisprudence) is based on legal precedent and reasoning by analogy (qiyas), and is thus considered similar to common law.^[21]
The main kinds of religious law are sharia in Islam, halakha in Judaism, and canon law in some Christian groups. In some cases these are intended purely as individual moral guidance, whereas in other cases they are intended and may be used as the basis for a country's legal system; the latter was particularly common during the Middle Ages.
Halakha is followed by Orthodox and Conservative Jews in both ecclesiastical and civil relations. No country is fully governed by halakha, but two Jewish people may decide, because of personal belief, to have a dispute heard by a Jewish court, and be bound by its rulings.
The Islamic legal system, consisting of sharia (Islamic law) and fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence), is the most widely used religious law system, and one of the three most common legal systems in the world alongside common law and civil law.^[22] It is based on both divine law, derived from the hadith of the Quran and Sunnah, and the rulings of ulema (jurists), who use the methods of ijma (consensus), qiyas (analogical deduction), ijtihad (research), and urf (common practice) to derive fatwā (legal opinions). An ulema was required to qualify for an ijazah (legal doctorate) at a madrasa (law school or college) before they could issue fatwā.^[23] During the Islamic Golden Age, classical Islamic law may have had an influence on the development of common law^[6] and several civil law institutions.^[24] Sharia law governs a number of Islamic countries, including Saudi Arabia and Iran, though most countries use Sharia law only as a supplement to national law. It can relate to all aspects of civil law, including property rights, contracts, and public law.

Civil law and canon law

Canon law is not divine law, properly speaking, because it is not found in revelation. Instead, it is seen as human law inspired by the word of God and applying the demands of that revelation to the actual situation of the church. Canon law regulates the internal ordering of the Catholic Church, the Eastern Orthodox Church and the Anglican Communion. Canon law is amended and adopted by the legislative authority of the church, such as councils of bishops, individual bishops for their respective sees, the Pope for the entire Catholic Church, and the British Parliament for the Church of England.

Because the attack took place outside the United States, the primary jurisdiction (or power) to investigate and prosecute the case automatically rests with the government of the country where it happened. Each country is sovereign over its own territory, which means that the foreign government will determine how to investigate an attack, whether a crime has occurred according to its own law, and the manner in which any prosecution occurs in its own courts or tribunals– the same way the United States (U.S.) does about crimes that happen within the U.S. Terrorist attacks against Americans in foreign countries may also be investigated by the U.S. government, usually by the Federal Bureau of Investigation; however, only a limited number of those investigations typically result in prosecutions in the U.S. The U.S. has power under its own laws to investigate and prosecute terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens that happen outside the U.S. (“extraterritorial jurisdiction”); however, because the U.S. does not have sovereignty in foreign countries, its ability to investigate is more limited than it would be if the crime happened in the U.S. That is one reason why terrorism prosecutions are more likely to take place in the country where the attack happened. The justice system in the foreign country provides a means of seeking justice for what you and your family have suffered. Each foreign legal system is unique. Each will differ from what you may be expecting based on your familiarity with the system in the U.S. Some of the differences between foreign and U.S. prosecutions may include which legal professionals will investigate the crime, what rights victims will have during the investigation and prosecution, and the length of time a trial may take. In addition, although there are law enforcement and justice professionals all over the world who are dedicated to helping you seek justice, they may lack the resources, capacity, and support within their own countries to go forward. You should be prepared for the possibility that the investigation may not identify or locate a suspect or, conversely, that perpetrators are identified and prosecuted quickly. We are here to help you understand what is happening in the foreign justice system and participate in the process to the extent you desire and foreign law allows. Because each country’s system -- and each case -- is different, it is impossible in a brochure to describe all of the legal possibilities. Nevertheless, the information that follows provides basic generalizations about legal and court systems, as well as some basic legal concepts, to help provide a context for what you may encounter or experience. Types of Legal Systems Legal systems vary from country to country, and sometimes within a single country. Although they develop in different ways, legal systems also have some similarities based on historically accepted justice ideals. Legal systems do fall into groups or patterns with some similar features within each group. Among the main groups that you might encounter are: 1) common law; 2) civil law; 3) religious law; and 4) customary law. Many countries employ more than one of these systems at the same time to create a hybrid system. In some places, the current security situation can also impact the way that legal systems work. It is helpful to understand some of the similarities and differences as you move through your case. This section of the brochure contains some very broad generalizations about the types of legal systems, but they are not specific to a country. DOJ/OVT can help you to identify the type of legal system present in the country where the prosecution is taking place. For more specific country information, please contact DOJ/ OVT. Common Law Legal Systems General principles: • The laws governing a case are based on both legal precedent, created by judges, and statutory laws, created by legislatures; • Usually an adversarial system, where the judge acts as an impartial referee between opposing parties to a case; • A jury may determine the facts , and a judge will decide the law to be applied; • There is an active role for prosecutors and defense attorneys; • Victims have a role as witnesses and may have rights as a victim to receive information and limited participation – however, victims are not a party in criminal cases; • The U.S. and the U.K. are examples of common law systems. Common law was originally developed by judges through case-by-case court decisions, rather than through legislation enacted by a legislature. In this system, much of the law is made by judges’ decisions, called precedent. This means that if a similar case has been resolved by a court in the past, a court is bound to follow the reasoning used in the prior decision. While judges are very important in common law systems, legislatures still have a part to play. Common law systems also rely on statutes that are passed by the legislature or a parliament, and judges have the role of interpreting how the legislature’s laws are applied in individual cases. In common law legal systems, legal proceedings are mostly adversarial, rather than inquisitorial. This means that for the most part, two opposing parties (adversaries) appear before a judge who moderates. Defendants are entitled to be present and to be represented by a lawyer. The attorneys on both sides generally have an active role in representing their clients throughout the case and in presenting evidence and arguments in court. A jury of people without legal training can decide the facts of the case, and if there is a conviction, then a judge determines the appropriate sentence based on the jury’s verdict.