RULE OF LAW
Key findings
Do legal and cultural norms ensure that state institutions act in accordance with the law?
Rule of law scores are weighted composites. Three qualitative policy assessments [ 
] each contribute one-sixth of this weighting, with two quantitative measures [ 
] each contributing an additional one-fourth.
Scores and methodology
] each contribute one-sixth of this weighting, with two quantitative measures [ ] each contributing an additional one-fourth. Scores and methodology
Rule of lawKey findings: Rule of law
Each 
represents an individual country and is positioned on a scale from 1 (lowest) to 10 (best). Position cursor over to see scores for individual countries.
Click country name in list or text for details.
represents an individual country and is positioned on a scale from 1 (lowest) to 10 (best). Position cursor over to see scores for individual countries.Click country name in list or text for details.
Score distribution
9.8
1
9.6
2
9.6
9.4
4
9.4
9.1
6
9.1
8.8
8
8.7
9
8.6
10
8.4
11
In this top group of countries, the rule of law is strong, typically as a result of corresponding societal values.
Several of these nations have little cultural tolerance for corruption, with these values reflected in corruption rates (New Zealand, Finland, Denmark). Sweden offers exemplary government transparency and virtually no corruption, but lacks an effective constitutional court .
Court systems are independent and respected in most of these nations (particularly Norway, Iceland, Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany.)
Though lacking written constitutions, Australia and the United Kingdom show comparatively high levels of legal certainty.
Several of these nations have little cultural tolerance for corruption, with these values reflected in corruption rates (New Zealand, Finland, Denmark). Sweden offers exemplary government transparency and virtually no corruption, but lacks an effective constitutional court .
Court systems are independent and respected in most of these nations (particularly Norway, Iceland, Netherlands, Switzerland, Germany.)
Though lacking written constitutions, Australia and the United Kingdom show comparatively high levels of legal certainty.
8.0
12
7.9
13
7.9
7.6
15
7.4
16
6.7
17
6.4
18
6.0
19
5.8
20
5.6
21
While political systems largely function smoothly in this middle group, specific institutions or groups sometimes act in ways hampering legal certainty. Corruption can exist at some levels of government.
Legal loopholes, linguistic variation, or bureaucratic power impede legal certainty in Canada, Belgium and Japan, while governments' discretionary power sometimes causes concern (Canada, Spain).
Anti-corruption institutions are relatively weak in some states (Austria, Luxembourg), and have been recently improved in others (Canada, Ireland, Belgium.) Corruption, particularly at local government levels, is persistent in France, Spain and Portugal.
U.S. federal courts have become politicized, while the country's legal system suffers from an excess of regulation and enforcement.
Legal loopholes, linguistic variation, or bureaucratic power impede legal certainty in Canada, Belgium and Japan, while governments' discretionary power sometimes causes concern (Canada, Spain).
Anti-corruption institutions are relatively weak in some states (Austria, Luxembourg), and have been recently improved in others (Canada, Ireland, Belgium.) Corruption, particularly at local government levels, is persistent in France, Spain and Portugal.
U.S. federal courts have become politicized, while the country's legal system suffers from an excess of regulation and enforcement.
5.2
22
4.8
23
4.5
24
4.0
25
3.7
26
3.3
27
2.9
28
1.9
29
1.8
30
In this group of countries, either government or private-sector corruption is often widespread, or inconsistent regulatory frameworks undermine legal certainty.
In a number of nations, corruption is a persistent and broad-ranging problem (Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Greece, Italy, Poland, Mexico, Turkey). The rule of law is relatively strong at the national level in South Korea and Italy, but declines substantially on the local level.
Inconsistent or often-changing regulations hampers legal predictability in Slovakia, Greece and Poland. Mexico's judicial system is antiquated and ineffective, while Turkey's government lacks administrative transparency.
In a number of nations, corruption is a persistent and broad-ranging problem (Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Greece, Italy, Poland, Mexico, Turkey). The rule of law is relatively strong at the national level in South Korea and Italy, but declines substantially on the local level.
Inconsistent or often-changing regulations hampers legal predictability in Slovakia, Greece and Poland. Mexico's judicial system is antiquated and ineffective, while Turkey's government lacks administrative transparency.
Rationale
A well-functioning democracy benefits from predictable, legally enforceable norms of state behavior.
Legal certainty assesses the extent to which executive actions are predictable (i.e., can be expected by reference to existing law). Judicial review evaluates the strength of scrutiny given by courts to the executive's actions and norms.
Corruption prevention looks at the means by which the state and society prevent public servants and politicians from accepting bribes, and at any mechanisms in place aimed at guaranteeing officeholder integrity.
Performance comparison
Use drop-down menus for selections. In all cases, higher scores reflect better performance.
