This article aims to conduct a comparative study of the criminal aspects of anti-corruption efforts in Iran and international standards. Administrative corruption, in addition to its economic and social impacts, carries serious criminal consequences, including embezzlement, bribery, abuse of public authority, and collusion in government contracts. Iranian criminal laws, including the Islamic Penal Code, the Law on Handling Administrative Violations, the Law on Promoting the Integrity of the Administrative System, and the Law on Officials’ Asset Declarations, prescribe penalties such as imprisonment, fines, asset confiscation, and disqualification from public office for offenders. However, weaknesses in law enforcement, the complexity of the judicial structure, and limitations in oversight by executive bodies reduce the deterrent effect of these penalties and exacerbate the gap between legal capacity and the actual state of corruption. At the international level, tools such as the Corruption Perceptions Index and instruments like the United Nations Convention against Corruption emphasize the necessity of judicial independence, effective enforcement of sanctions, and cross-border cooperation in detecting and prosecuting corruption. The comparative study demonstrates that achieving anti-corruption objectives requires not only sufficient criminal legislation but also strengthened judicial and administrative efficiency, alignment with international standards, and mechanisms for practical oversight and transparency. The findings suggest that enhancing criminal penalties and ensuring impartial law enforcement can both reduce domestic corruption and improve Iran’s standing in global anti-corruption rankings.