Female Genital Mutilation/Cutting (FGM/C) constitutes one of the most severe forms of gender‑based violence and persists despite extensive international human rights commitments. This article adopts an analytical‑comparative approach to examine the relationship between international legal obligations and national criminal responses to FGM/C. By analyzing key human rights instruments—including CEDAW, the Maputo Protocol, and the Istanbul Convention—and comparing four legal systems (Iran, Kenya, Egypt, and France), the study demonstrates that criminalization alone is insufficient without institutional support and cultural transformation. The findings reveal that in Iran, despite the lack of any religious justification for the practice, the absence of a specific criminal provision results in judicial silence and inadequate victim protection. In contrast, legal systems with explicit legislation and dedicated enforcement mechanisms have achieved tangible reductions in prevalence. The article concludes that effective eradication of FGM/C requires a holistic criminal policy that integrates explicit criminalization, institutional safeguards, and socio‑cultural reform, enabling a shift from passive tolerance toward an active, rights‑based penal approach.