With the rapid advancement of digital technologies and the widespread use of electronic platforms in commercial exchanges, electronic messages have emerged as a primary means of communication in legal and business environments. This development has increasingly brought electronic messages to the forefront of evidentiary processes in civil and commercial disputes. In the Iranian legal system, the acceptance of such messages as admissible evidence is accompanied by various theoretical and practical challenges. This article aims to analyze the legal and technical reliability of electronic messages in proving claims within Iran's legal framework and to conduct a comparative analysis with international legal instruments, including the UNCITRAL Model Law and the European Union’s eIDAS Regulation. Using a descriptive-analytical methodology and a comparative approach, the study examines statutory provisions, judicial practices, scholarly perspectives, and international experiences. The findings reveal that although Iran's Electronic Commerce Act outlines some general requirements for accepting electronic messages as evidence, legislative gaps, ambiguities in defining conditions for their admissibility, and deficiencies in technical and security infrastructure hinder their broad acceptance in Iranian courts. Compared to international models, Iran’s legal system requires structural reforms, the development of detailed implementing regulations, and enhanced international cooperation. The article concludes by offering recommendations to revise relevant laws, strengthen encryption frameworks, and promote the use of secure digital identity verification systems to improve the admissibility and reliability of electronic evidence.