Interpol Red Notices

Berkeley Square Solicitors are leading London criminal defence lawyers recognised for their expertise in international crime and challenging Interpol Red Notices

With increasing international co-operation in the fight against organised crime and terrorism, it is no surprise that record numbers of Interpol red notices are being issued year-on-year. Often referred to as a list of the world’s ”most wanted international criminals” there will inevitably be serious reputational and other consequences for anyone named on a Interpol red notice.

Experience has shown us that red notices can be abused, as member states try to manipulate Interpol’s processes for political or other ends. This is often the case with countries that do not uphold internationally recognised minimum human rights standards. The Council of Europe in 2019 “found that Interpol’s procedures had been frequently abused for political or corrupt reasons by certain countries.” (Resolution 2315 of 2019).

Red Notices are easy to obtain but difficult to remove. If you are named in a Red Notice we suggest you seek urgent legal advice from lawyers familiar with the opaque internal structures within Interpol. BSQ can take steps to have the notice removed and help you with other immediate mitigating measures, making you aware of the likelihood of arrest when crossing international borders for example. BSQ can also advise on how anyone named in a Red Notice on collateral issues such as problems that may follow in obtaining credit and bank account facilities, immigration issues and actions taken by employers such as unfair dismissal.

Defending A Red Notice

Anyone named in a red notice has the right to seek its removal. The rules governing red notice appeals allow individuals to apply to the Commission for Control of Files (“CCIF”), Interpol’s internal review body which is based in Lyon for the red notice to be deleted.

BSQ’s international crime team headed by Roger Sahota, has extensive experience of advising individuals in challenging red notices and in making deletion applications to the CCIF.

What is A Red Notice?

There is a common misconception promoted in the media and Hollywood that Interpol is a police force. In reality, Interpol has no investigatory powers or judicial role. Instead, Interpol acts as a communications network facilitating communication between the NCB’s of each member state. The Red Notice simply confirms that an accusation has been made of criminal conduct against an individual by a member state.

Issuing A Red Notice

Interpol will issue a red notice when asked to do so by the National Crime Bureau (“NCB” i.e. domestic law-enforcement agencies) of one of it’s 190 member states. This normally occurs where a provisional arrest warrant is outstanding and the requesting state seeks the extradition of a named individual. The NCB of the requesting state will complete an application form which is transmitted to Interpol’s HQ in Lyon. The application form will include the name and personal details with a photograph of the wanted person and a description of the crimes they are said to have committed.

Interpol conducts a preliminary analysis of whether each Red Notice complies with Interpol’s rules before the red notice is disseminated on Interpol’s database and circulated amongst the NCB’s of each member state.

Interpol operates on the assumption that member states provide information that is accurate and act in good faith. Therefore, minimal scrutiny is made of Red Notice applications at this stage. Consequently, this initial review of incoming government requests has been criticised for overlooking the majority of abusive red notices and diffusions. This has become an increasing problem since 2003 when Interpol implemented a new system of electronic communications which has made it much easier for member states to request red notices. According to its 2020 Annual Report there are now 66,370 Red Notice issued in total by Interpol.

If the Red Notice is rejected by Interpol there are other alternative options open to the Requesting State. Some member states have been criticised for targeting individuals after abusive red notices have been deleted by issuing a Diffusion (see below) or circulating the individuals name on the database of Lost and Stolen Passports.

Travelling on a Red Notice

When crossing international borders an individual may find that a Red Notice is flagged when their passport is checked. While a red notice is not an arrest warrant, many states believe it provides sufficient grounds to detain someone pending their extradition. In general, countries with a civil based legal system are more likely to arrest an individual than countries with a common law system. Whether an extradition treaty is in place with the Requesting State is also significant.

Anyone named in a Red Notice or diffusion should take country specific advice before travelling internationally. BSQ can provide specific advice on the likely consequences of travelling to any particular jurisdiction.

The Red Notice Database

Interpol’s website contains details of individuals sought on Red Notices. However, only a fraction of all red notices issued are published on it. Most remain confidential. BSQ can apply to the CCiF on any individual’s behalf for information held by Interpol against their name – the procedure to be followed is similar to a request for deletion and is considered below.

Most typically appeals arise because it is alleged that a member state has violated Articles 83 or 76 of Interpol’s constitution i.e. that they seek an individual’s arrest not for criminal conduct but for activities of a “political, military, religious or racial character.”

The rules governing CCIF’s procedure are complicated and have been criticised for their lack of transparency. For example, there is no right to a hearing, or to disclosure of the material provided to Interpol when the red notice request was made. Long delays are commonplace.

There is also no mechanism for an appeal against any decision taken by Interpol after considering the CCIA’s recommendations. We specialise in challenging red notices particularly from Russia, China, Bangladesh and the former C.I.S. countries i.e. Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Belarus and Ukraine as well as bounced cheque red notices from the UAE. We also work with local lawyers to prevent and forestall any extradition request and revoke red notices.

Our team also has many years of experience in dealing with ancillary issues such as extradition and mutual assistance requests.

The Right Strategy

Deciding on what is the right strategy when challenging a red notice will depend on the facts of each particular case. Interpol’s rules, procedures and caselaw are obscure and not widely known. BSQ has a specialist expertise in this area and extensive experience of submitting deletion requests to the CCIF.

To request access to data or the deletion or correction of a red notice an application form must be submitted to the CCF. Any submissions are limited to a 10 page summary of the facts setting out why Interpol‘s rules have been violated together with any additional documentary on supporting evidence an and other information that will be relevant.

Any application for deletion must meet the criteria for the admissibility of requests. These can be found in Article 32 of Interpol statute and Rule 30 of the Operating Rules of the Commission. This sets out guidance for the format in which the request must be submitted and the documents that should be provided.

Within 30 days the CCIF will confirm is the request is admissible and the application will be allocated to a Requests Chamber. The CCIF is divided into two chambers which collectively have seven members. The members of the CCIF are elected by Interpol’s General Assembly.

The Chamber will then consider the merits of the application. It can do so at any time but most often decisions are released after one of the three annual sessions of the CCIF. Any information held on Interpol’s database will be examined to ascertain if it complies with the organisations rules. If required, further enquiries will be sent to the Requesting States’ National Crime Bureau. https://www.interpol.int/en/Who-we-are/Commission-for-the-Control-of-INTERPOL-s-Files-CCF/CCF-sessions-and-decisions

Within nine months from the date that it is declared admissible a decision on the request should be taken. This can be extended on reasonable grounds. Decisions are normally made in writing without a hearing – while the CCIF’s rules do permit an oral hearing none have ever been held in the organisation’s history.

Once a decision is made, it will be forwarded to the General Secretariat of Interpol and must be implemented within one month of receipt. A copy of the final decision will be sent to the Applicant and to the Requesting State. The final decision will be redacted to ensure that no confidential information is revealed.

A decision of the Request Chamber is final and binding on Interpol. There is no independent body to appeal to. A decision can only be challenged where new facts have come to life which could have led to a different decision. An application for revision must be made within six months of the discovery of any new facts justifying a review.

Interpol’s Rules

Interpol’s Rules on the Processing of Data sets out how Interpol deals with Red Notices and Diffusions.

Interpol is supposed to limit itself strictly to ordinary criminal law offences and is not allowed to permit its systems to be used to pursue political, military, racial or religious offences. A red notice can be removed if it is politically motivated. Article 3 of the INTERPOL Constitution provides that “It is strictly forbidden for the Organization to undertake any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character.”

Red Notices can also be challenged if they violates international human rights standards . Article 2(1) of the Constitution states that the aims of INTERPOL are to ensure and promote the widest possible mutual assistance between all criminal police authorities within the limits of the laws existing in the different countries and in the spirit of the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”. Red Notices cannot therefore impinge on fundamental human right protected by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Further, a Red Notice can be removed for breach of Interpol Rules on Processing Data.

Article 83 of Interpol Rules states that Red Notice can only be issued for serious “ordinary-law” crimes and must contain sufficient or accurate data.

Diffusions

Diffusions are not screened by Interpol before they are transmitted and members are therefore free to disseminate them as they wish. A diffusion is similar in content to a Red Notice and is sent by the National Crime Bureau of the requesting state to Interpol and to the NCB’s other member states. Fair Trials International has called for a few reform of the system of diffusions which, as with Red Notices, has been criticised as it is open to abuse by member states. Diffusions can be challenged via the CCIF vis a similar procedure to Red Notices.

Client A was accused of an assault in India and was sought for trial in India. The allegation was said to have taken many years ago. BSQ represented A in a successful challenge to the Government of India’s request for his extradition from the UK where he now resides. Client A also successfully appealed to the CCiF for a red notice issued against his name by the Indian Government to be deleted. The CCiF found (amongst other things) that the information supplied to support the notice was not reliable.

Client B left Dubai some years ago but has recently discovered that a red notice was issued in his name. The notice concerns an unfunded cheque issues by B before he left the country, Most countries do not consider this as conduct of a criminal nature and following a 2019 CCIF decision Interpol have issued new guidance on when such notices should be removed. BSQ are currently advising B on applying to have the notice removed. BSQ partner Roger Sahota is instructed.

Client C was a member of the security services in a former Russian republic. Seen leaving the military and emigrating to Europe he has discovered that he is the subject of a red notice he believes to be politically motivated.

BSQ are currently advising C on applying to have the notice removed.