The Basel Accords refer to a series of international banking regulatory frameworks developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision to strengthen the stability and resilience of the global banking system. Introduced as Basel I, Basel II, and Basel III, these accords establish minimum capital requirements, risk management standards, and supervisory principles for internationally active banks. Their primary purpose is to reduce the risk of bank failure, promote financial stability, and enhance consistency in banking regulation across jurisdictions. The Basel III framework and its 2017 Final Reforms represent the most advanced stage of this regulatory evolution, addressing weaknesses revealed by the global financial crisis and subsequent regulatory experience. Banking institutions play a central role in economic development, making their stability essential. The global financial crisis that began in 2007 exposed significant weaknesses in existing regulatory frameworks and led to the failure of several major banks, despite the earlier establishment of Basel I and Basel II by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. These shortcomings prompted the development of the Basel III framework as a direct response to the crisis. However, early criticisms of the initial Basel III Accord, particularly regarding variability in risk-weighted assets, reliance on internal models, and opportunities for regulatory arbitrage, led the Basel Committee to issue the Basel III Final Reforms in 2017, which represented a substantial upgrade to the post-crisis regulatory architecture. This study reviews the evolution of the Basel Accords; examines the key components of Basel I, Basel II, and Basel III; and analyses the enhancements introduced through the Basel III Final Reforms. It also considers the major arguments and criticisms surrounding these accords, highlighting the persistent challenges of achieving global regulatory consistency. Given the inability of earlier Basel frameworks to prevent bank failures and the fact that many jurisdictions have yet to fully implement the 2017 reforms, the paper underscores the need for ongoing evaluation of international banking regulation as national authorities adapt and refine their supervisory approaches to strengthen financial stability.