Does the general procedure of law vary from one country to another
<p>I am sure the statutes and other legal terminologies vary quite significantly from one country to another.</p>
<p>But does the general procedure of enforcing law, litigation vary significantly from one country to another?</p>

<p>Of course it does. Some significant practical differences:</p>
<ul>
<li>Is there the rule of law or just corruption and/or autocracy? For the following points, I'll assume the rule of law.</li>
<li>Is the legal system <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adversarial_system" rel="nofollow noreferrer">adversarial</a> or <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inquisitorial_system" rel="nofollow noreferrer">inquisitorial</a>? There are systems where the judges are the &quot;referees&quot; between prosecution and defense, or between two litigants. And then there are systems where the judges have the role of finding the truth, e.g. by questioning witnesses (the inquisitorial system <em>may</em> be better for innocent parties without a lawyer ...).</li>
<li>Is there a split between the roles of judge and jury, are the judge and jury combined, or are there just judges? Especially in an adversarial system, the jury decides questions of awards damages or decides guilt and innocence, and possibly passes the sentence. In other systems, these decisions are made by judges. Sometimes there is a panel of professional and lay judges, who are deliberating together.</li>
<li>Judges may be elected or career professionals. That impacts how they are swayed by popular opinon, or the opinion of other professionals who decide about promotions.</li>
</ul>

criminal-law civil-law