INTRODUCTION

A legal system is a system used to describe the process for interpreting and enforcing laws,
and making sure that the laws are followed in a country. A political system is a system where
the process of legal instructions are determined by government officials in government.
These instructions constitute a government, or state, and create institutions. If one country has
inadequate policies that build an unjust and bias system compared to another country, which
system successes through its laws and rationality, then the country which thrives with its
rational system will demonstrate the most social change and orderly discipline in their
country. The less governed country will struggle to portray social change and make their
country a better place to live in.
Australia’s political system is made up of a bicameral parliament, which have two houses
called the House of Representatives, and The Senate. These houses are responsible for natural
laws like trade and taxation, and legislation must be approved in both houses. Government
rules and responsibilities are categorised into the powers of three branches- legislative,
executive, and judicial stages. The legislative stage is where the parliament makes the laws,
the executive stage is where the government administers the laws, and the judicial stage is
where the courts establish and enforce the laws.
Australia’s legal system is a parliamentary democratic system derived by the common law
system based of the English model. Australian citizens get to elect representatives to a
legislative parliament to make decisions for the country, on behalf of their citizens. In the
Australian legal system, powers get distributed between The Commonwealth government,
and the six states and three self-governing territories. There are four principal federal courts
ranked lowest to highest based on their power. The lowest ranked court is the Local and
Magistrates’ Court, followed by the District and County Courts, then the Supreme Courts,
then the Federal Courts. The highest ranking court is the High Court. The four main
principles in Australia’s legal system is equality before the law, fairness, right to be
represented, and transparency.
Different countries develop different political and legal systems through the enforcement and
classification of laws in their country. Different political and legal systems have significant
affect towards the stability of their country which can be demonstrated through Carlos
Ghosn’s corrupted legal case, where the Japanese judiciary serves justice and can promote
equality and social evolution compared to the disastrous COVID-19 struggles in India, where
India’s democratic republic fails to provide change to its country.
After the end of Japan’s dependency with Western influencers like Germany and France in
the mid-19th Century. Unlike the Australian legal system, Japan has developed a modern 19th
Century hybrid legal system, derived from the legal codes of Germany and France, and
American Law. Japan’s hybrid system is mainly classified as a civil law legal system,
through its laws.. Like Australia’s legal system, the Japanese legal system has four principal
courts which signify the importance of the court based on the type of case. The court with the
lowest power is the summary court, followed by the family court, the district court, and the
high court. The supreme court is the highest ranked and therefore is the court held with the
majority of power. The legal system in Japan portrays a significant amount of justice
through its well-structured and enforced laws, which allows its country to build strength and
successful changes whenever needed.
Source 1 shows the triumph of the legal system in Japan, which is exemplified through its
significant justice and fairness towards the Carlos Ghosn case. In 2019, Carlos Ghosn, the
former Nissan and Renault CEO, was arrested after attempting to flee to Lebanon from Japan
over several corruption charges. Some of the corruption charges that Ghosn faced was
fraudulently against expenses using his company’s (Nissan) account, embezzlement, and
financial misconduct. As Source 1 indicates, Ghosn’s accountable face was the cover of
major media headlines, as he continually portrayed himself as an innocent victim of “Japan’s
hostage justice systems”, and denied the charges made by court. As a result of Ghosn’s
crimes, he was separated from his wife, paid a fine of 500 million yen, and was jailed for ten
years. This case sparked a huge controversial discussion over the Japanese justice system and
whether the final verdict and accuracy of the trials and Ghosn’s sentencing reflects the values
of the Japanese justice system or is consistent with the international law.
This demonstrates how the Japanese legal system is very fair and precise towards the Carlos
Ghosn case trials. the system can responsibility and rationally review the Ghosn case and
establish impartial punishments for the crimes Carlos Ghosn committed. Japan’s enhanced
laws, critical system values, and strict policies enable the system to remarkably protect
citizens in Japan and punish and prevent similar criminal cases from occurring. The harsh
penalties that the Japanese courts positioned Ghosn in is an example of how Japan prevents
the uprising of criminal rates, incarceration, and gun ownership in its country, and thrives to
maintain its ranking of being one of the safest countries in the world.
Unlike the Australian political system, the political system in India is a federal democratic
system and is largely based on the UK model. The Indian system is constructed over a federal
legislative branch, which comprises of the President, the Council of States as the upper
house, and the House of People as the lower house. There is a three-step process to passing a
bill in India like the Australian political system. The bill must go through the introduction,
consideration, and final passage stages before obtaining the president’s assent. Unlike the
Japanese legal system, the political system in India portrays minimum amount of justice and
peace through its poor establishment of laws, which enables its country and citizens to
grapple for their living.

Source 2 expresses how the failing political system is unable to control the outbreak of
COVID-19 and guide their country towards a safer future. Millions of citizens in India are
dying from the pandemic, and the country is dealing with approximately 400,000 daily
COVID cases. Source 2 shows us citizens reading the newspaper titled “Vaccine for all
“which resembles the government’s promise, only to find that the vaccination centre is “out
of stock” for vaccinations. This demonstrates how the country is running low on raw
materials like medical oxygen supplies, vaccination rollouts, and ventilators to help India
survive, and is relying on exports from other countries to survive. Hospitals are also filled to
their capacity, and the economy in India is crumbling and doesn’t have enough money to
create new hospitals and have cleaner air systems to reduce the transmission of the virus in
hospitals. At least 11 states and union territories have imposed some form of restrictions,
Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government is unwilling to impose a national lockdown,
concerned about the economic impact. The Prime Minister has also been criticised for letting
millions of largely unmasked people attend religious festivals and crowded political rallies.
This demonstrates how India’s political system is weak because of the unstable laws it has
created towards keeping its citizens safe during the pandemic. The president’s confirmation
towards no major restrictions in India and no lockdown or curfew at an earlier stage verifies
that Indian citizens elect government officials based on their popularity rather than their
strength and abilities to govern a country, which leads to a weaker society through incohesive
laws. This leads to absurd planning in government, which leads to shortages in essential
materials and chaos in a country.

Various countries create diverse political and legal systems derived from the categories and
implementation of their laws. The legal systems in both Australia and Japan have four
principal courts which are arranged in order from lowest to highest based on their power. The
political systems in India and Australia both have a three-step process to ratifying a bill/law.
Based on their policies and stability of their system, one country’s judicial system may thrive
more than the other country’s political system, which may struggle to bring justice to the
country with the least rational system. An example of two contrasting systems is the Japanese
hybrid system versus the Indian federal democratic system. The Japanese legal system
obtained continues justice and fairness towards Carlos Ghosn during the corruption case,
whilst India’s weak political system is failing to guide Indian citizens to a safer future and
prevent COVID-19 and instead using illogical planning to make India crumble. Political
systems, like the Indian political system will have a great effect towards the increasing their
country’s potential rate of harm and leading the country’s citizens to a deadly future. The
effectiveness of a stable political and legal system in a country, is shown through the success
of the Japanese legal system, in which the country’s system can prevent possible harms and
protect the country and the citizens, leading their country to a safe and wealthy future.