A comparative study of preventive approaches to corruption in the laws of Iran and Sweden

According to their needs, different countries have adopted various tools and strategies to prevent corruption. The subject of this research is the comparative comparison of anti-corruption approaches in the two countries of Iran and Sweden. Therefore, the question of this research is, from a comparative point of view, what are the similarities and differences between the two countries of Iran and Sweden in the fight against corruption? The hypothesis of the research is: Iran's laws have paid unsystematic and insufficient attention to the field of corruption prevention and its indicators such as conflict of interest, transparency and the right to access information. In contrast to these superficial and non-structural laws of Iran, in Sweden, attention and respect to the aforementioned principles have a history of nearly three centuries, and there is a systematic, precise and defined charge in the implementation and guarantee of these indicators in Sweden. The findings of this study show that The aforementioned indicators have a non-structural and superficial position in Iran's legal system, while these principles have been implemented in Sweden's legal system for at least the last two centuries, and it has more superficial and detailed defects than Iran's legal system. The research method in this article is a qualitative comparative and descriptive analytical type, and the data has been collected from various sources in the form of a library.