Substantive review is the process by which a court examines whether a law violates the constitution. This type of review is based on the idea that the constitution is the supreme law of the land and that all other laws must be in accordance with it.

Procedural review is the process by which a court examines whether a law was passed in accordance with the proper procedures. This type of review is based on the idea that the legislature has the power to make laws, but that it must do so in accordance with the procedures set forth in the constitution.

Structural review is the process by which a court examines whether a law violates the separation of powers. This type of review is based on the idea that the constitution divides the government into three branches - the legislative, executive, and judicial - and that each branch has its own powers and responsibilities.

Substantive review is the most common type of judicial review in the United States. This is because the US Constitution contains a number of specific provisions that limit the power of the government. For example, the First Amendment prohibits the government from interfering with freedom of speech and religion.

Procedural review is the most common type of judicial review in the United Kingdom. This is because the UK Constitution is not written down in a single document. Instead, it is made up of a collection of laws, statutes, and conventions. This makes it difficult for the courts to conduct substantive review of laws.

Structural review is the most common type of judicial review in Canada. This is because the Canadian Constitution contains a number of provisions that divide the powers of the government between the federal and provincial governments. The courts often use structural review to determine whether a law is within the jurisdiction of the federal government or the provincial government.

Substantive review is the most common type of judicial review in Australia. This is because the Australian Constitution contains a number of specific provisions that limit the power of the government. For example, the Constitution prohibits the government from discriminating against people on the basis of their race, religion, or sex.

Procedural review is the most common type of judicial review in New Zealand. This is because the New Zealand Constitution is not written down in a single document. Instead, it is made up of a collection of laws, statutes, and conventions. This makes it difficult for the courts to conduct substantive review of laws.

Substantive review is the most common type of judicial review in South Africa. This is because the South African Constitution contains a number of specific provisions that limit the power of the government. For example, the Constitution prohibits the government from discriminating against people on the basis of their race, religion, or sex.

Substantive review is the most common type of judicial review in India. This is because the Indian Constitution contains a number of specific provisions that limit the power of the government. For example, the Constitution prohibits the government from discriminating against people on the basis of their race, religion, or sex.

China does not have a system of judicial review. This means that the courts do not have the power to review the constitutionality of laws.

Russia does not have a system of judicial review. This means that the courts do not have the power to review the constitutionality of laws.

Substantive review is the most common type of judicial review in Brazil. This is because the Brazilian Constitution contains a number of specific provisions that limit the power of the government. For example, the Constitution prohibits the government from discriminating against people on the basis of their race, religion, or sex.

Substantive review is the most common type of judicial review in Mexico. This is because the Mexican Constitution contains a number of specific provisions that limit the power of the government. For example, the Constitution prohibits the government from discriminating against people on the basis of their race, religion, or sex.

Substantive review is the most common type of judicial review in Argentina. This is because the Argentine Constitution contains a number of specific provisions that limit the power of the government. For example, the Constitution prohibits the government from discriminating against people on the basis of their race, religion, or sex.