The Role of Public Participation in Corruption Prevention in the Legal Systems of Iran, Norway, and Finland

Abstract

Corruption poses a persistent structural challenge to good governance, the rule of law, and public trust, prompting legal systems to increasingly prioritize prevention alongside traditional punitive responses. This article examines the role of public participation as a preventive mechanism in anti-corruption policy through a comparative analysis of the legal systems of Iran, Norway, and Finland. Using a scientific narrative review and descriptive legal analysis, the study explores how public participation is conceptualized, institutionalized, and operationalized within different legal, institutional, and cultural contexts. The analysis demonstrates that while all three systems formally recognize the importance of preventing corruption, they diverge significantly in the legal design and practical effectiveness of participatory mechanisms. In Norway and Finland, public participation is deeply embedded in governance structures through access to information laws, administrative transparency, protected reporting mechanisms, independent media, and decentralized oversight institutions, supported by high levels of social trust and legal certainty. In contrast, Iran’s legal framework reflects a more centralized, state-centered approach in which citizen participation is primarily channeled through formal complaint mechanisms and remains constrained by procedural barriers, limited legal protections, and socio-institutional factors. The comparative findings highlight that effective public participation depends on a convergence of legal safeguards, institutional independence, transparency norms, and cultural legitimacy. The study argues that participatory mechanisms cannot be mechanically transplanted across legal systems and must be adapted to domestic constitutional principles and social realities. The article concludes by outlining policy-oriented implications for strengthening public participation in corruption prevention within Iran’s legal system through gradual, context-sensitive reforms that enhance legal clarity, institutional responsiveness, and civic trust.