Extradition: the scourge of the Interpol red notice

Extradition: the scourge of the Interpol red notice

Established in 1923, the Interpol is an international organization that facilitates worldwide police cooperation and crime control. This organization has 194 member countries. Its headquarters are located in the city of Lyon, France. The Interpol supports investigative work, trains police personnel, and shares its wealth of experience in areas such as the fight against international terrorism, organized crime, and various types of cybercrimes. The activities of the Interpol do not end with policing these crimes. The organization also fights child pornography, political corruption, and violations of intellectual property rights. The annual budget of the Interpol exceeds $150 million.

Since the Interpol assists in the search for criminals hiding from the law, many countries seek its assistance to track fugitives and return them to the respective jurisdictions. To do this, information is received about the specific person from the country requesting such assistance. This information includes his/her biographical data, his/her aliases, physical description and birthmarks, as well as an account of the crimes he/she committed or is suspected of committing. The Interpol enters all of these data into its database and publishes the so-called “Red Notice” to notify all member countries that the person is wanted by a specific country in connection with the listed offenses. In essence, the “Red Notice” is a call to other countries to assist in the identification and arrest of the wanted person. The Interpol does not make arrests itself. In 2017, the number of “Red Notices” exceeded 13,000.

If the “Red Notice” leads to the identification of the fugitive in a member country, its authorities notify the country that requested the search (the “applicant country”), which in turn requests the extradition of the fugitive. The court in the country that arrested the fugitive decides whether to extradite the fugitive or not. There is no obligation to extradite; in other words, the country that arrested the fugitive decides what value to attach to the request for extradition. Thus, the existence of an extradition treaty between the applicant country and the country that arrested the fugitive is of paramount importance. The absence of such an agreement does not necessarily mean that the country where the fugitive is held will refuse to extradite him/her to the applicant country. Note that the term “fugitive” does not necessarily relate to the literal meaning in the given context. For instance, the person in question might not be aware of the “Red Notice” issued for him/her by the Interpol, and he/she may be surprised at being suddenly arrested at an airport of a country he/she may have been visiting as a tourist.

The usefulness of the Interpol is undeniable. However, some countries use this organization to fight against political opposition. Very often, the authorities of a member country initiate a trumped-up criminal case against a political dissident or human rights activist. Later, when the subject leaves his/her country to flee political persecution disguised as criminal prosecution, the police of that country submit a request to Interpol, describing purely criminal crimes allegedly committed by the subject, such as attempted murder, terrorism, extremism, drug trafficking, corruption, and ethnic violence. The following countries have been recognized as the most malicious violators of the Interpol Charter and various international laws: China, Russia, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Iran, Turkey, Kazakhstan, Azerbaijan, Belarus, and Tunisia. Therefore, these countries hope to spread their influence and repressive mechanisms practically throughout the world by using the Interpol.

Our law firm has experience in these matters. We have repeatedly filed a petition with the Interpol, seeking the withdrawal of the “Red Notice” issued against our client. This is painstaking work because the petition must be justified. We need to prove the true reasons behind the requesting country’s demand that the Interpol issue a “Red Notice” against our client. Very often, we invite a recognized expert on the applicant country, who discloses the mechanism of prosecution followed by the authorities of that country against political dissenters or activists. The services of an expert lawyer are extremely useful in such cases, as he/she is adept at analyzing the procedural and other relevant violations in the pre-trial investigation conducted by the authorities. The lawyer can also discuss the dependence of the courts on law on the enforcement agencies and the inability of the client to achieve a fair trial. We work with such experts in a number of countries and attest that their help in such matters is invaluable.

Our partner Boris Palant also successfully resisted attempts to extradite our client. The court that decided upon the matter was located in Monaco. In such cases, it is essential to conduct a detailed study of all the provisions of the extradition treaty between the two countries, establish close cooperation with the local lawyer representing the client in court and, sometimes, even assist the search for such a lawyer.

The Interpol has issued “Red Notices” against a number of our clients seeking asylum in the United States. In such cases, it is essential to file a petition with the Interpol to cancel the “Red Notices” since the US Immigration Service is certain to check the Interpol database when reviewing the applications of asylum seekers.

If you require our law firm to consult us confidentially on this topic, please contact us by e-mail at info@myimmigrationlawyerusa.com.

You can also contact us on WhatsApp at + 1 917-392-0057.

Request consultation

Office locations

Connecticut
256 Post Road East, Suite 206
Westport, CT 06880
WhatsApp: +1 (203) 451-3240
Phone: +1 (203) 557-9110 Fax: +1 (203) 349-6133