Recently, our team at Schlun & Elseven Rechtsanwälte was contacted by a client because he suspected to be subject of an Interpol Red Notice issued by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. This case is an excellent example to outline how we handle Interpol cases for our clients successfully from gathering the relevant information to building up an efficient defence strategy to finally removing the Interpol Notice. In order to facilitate the full comprehension of the case and its background, we will also provide a summary of information on the organization “Interpol” and the meaning of Interpol Red Notices within this article. If you would like to gain further information on that topic, please have a look at our related articles.

If you are concerned with Interpol matters yourself or have any specific questions, please make sure to contact us directly. Our team of high qualified Interpol and Extradition lawyers is available to provide you with individual legal consultation on your case. The case presented in this article is just an example of how our extradition lawyers handle Interpol issues; however, each case requires specialised assistance. To develop a successful defence, we work in close cooperation directly with our clients. Therefore, if you are looking for dependable legal advice, contact us today to ensure your rights are protected.

Interpol is an international organization designed to allow better communication and coordination in cross-border police work. Interpol Red Notices are issued based on a national arrest warrant. An Interpol Red Notice is the request of a member state to locate and arrest an individual. The intention is finally to extradite the person, so they can face legal proceedings in the country in question. Interpol Red Notices are only designed for criminal offences, the matter is not allowed to be of an administrative character. Furthermore, every Interpol Notice has to be in accordance with the Interpol Constitution.

These rules do also apply to Diffusion orders. A Diffusion order is another – less formal – type of alert mechanism. They aim to forward requests for arresting or localizing of individuals. That means in effect that the risk of getting arrested and extradited inheres to Diffusions in the same way as it does to Red Notices.

If you would like to receive more information about Interpol Red Notices, other Interpol Notices or extradition, please see our related articles.

In this particular case, the client did not know that he was the subject of an Interpol Red Notice. When he contacted our team, he only suspected there could be an Interpol Notice from Saudi Arabia issued towards him. Due to that assumption, we decided to exercise his right of access to the Interpol files. As we provided all the required documents under Rule 30 of the Operating Rules of the Commission, the request was found admissible. However, there was no data concerning our client found in Interpol´s databases at the time of the request.

Two years later, we exercised our client’s right of access again. This time, the Commission informed our client that there was a Red Notice by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia issued towards him. It was based on a national arrest warrant for “commercial fraud” issued by the Public Prosecution in Saudi Arabia.

To accomplish the removal of the Red Notice, we lodged a complaint on behalf of our client. The complaint was based on various reasons. The arguments we submitted and the finding of the Commission will be discussed later on in this article. Again, the complaint was found admissible per Rule 30 of the Operating Rules of the Commission, which initiated the study of our client’s case by the Commission. During the study, the Commission also contacted the Saudi Arabian authorities. The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia had to confirm the validity of the proceedings and provide answers to the Commission’s questions. Mostly based on the arguments brought by our client and the answers provided by the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the Commission then had to decide on our client’s case in their session.

We based our client’s complaint on different reasons. First of all, an Interpol Red Notice can only be issued in case of a serious ordinary-law crime. The crucial factor in deciding whether a case involves a serious ordinary-law crime is the nature of the case. Our client was accused of commercial fraud. To outline a lack of evidence on our client’s involvement in criminal activities, we presented information about our client’s position and the accusations that substantiated the commercial nature of the case.

Additionally, the Saudi Arabian authorities failed to describe the criminal activities clearly and precisely. Under Article 83 (2)(b)(i) RPD (Interpol’s Rules on the Processing of Data), every Interpol Red Notice issued must contain sufficient judicial data, which comprises “a succinct and clear description of the criminal activities of the wanted person”. The information made available when the Commission asked the Saudi authorities about our client’s case did not meet these essential requirements.

The sole assertion that our client was involved in any criminal activities or played a notable role in such matters is no sufficient grounding for the consequences one has to face whilst being subject of an Interpol Red Notice. The mere fact that our client held an official position with certain responsibilities is insufficient to determine whether he was involved in any criminal activities.

The function of the Interpol Commission is, inter alia, to ensure the compliance of the data stored in Interpol’s databases with the aforementioned rules of the RPD. It is not responsible for considering questions of evidence or determining the innocence or guilt of subjects of Interpol Red Notices. Instead, the Commission focuses on studying the key questions. In this particular case, the key question was whether the information provided by the Saudi authorities described the involvement of our client in any criminal activities in a sufficient way to prove that he had committed a serious ordinary-law crime.

The Commission decided on this matter in favour of our client. However, due to the lack of a clear description regarding his alleged criminal activities, the Commission stated it could not be sure that the data stored about our client was compliant with Interpol’s rules. In conclusion, the Commission initiated the deletion of the Interpol Red Notice issued towards our client. Since the commission had already disposed of in favour of our client based on this argumentation, other contentions, which our team of lawyers presented when we filed the application for our client, did not even have to be examined.

As a result, we could successfully achieve the removal of the Interpol Red Notice for our client. This case emphasizes that the mere allegation of criminal activities is no valid justification for being subject of an Interpol Red Notice.

As another example of the successful removal of an Interpol Red Notice, this case demonstrates how clear argumentation and precise legal work can be crucial in deciding a case. Due to the close cooperation with our client and extensive induction into the details of the individual case, we were able to present our arguments well-developed and point out the issued notice’s legal inadequacies. In this way, we could finally help our client succeed and achieve his goal of deleting his stored data.

If you find yourself dealing with any Interpol or extradition law matters, make sure to contact us as soon as possible. Our specialized team works closely with clients worldwide, advising them in a wide range of Interpol and extradition law cases. Thanks to our personal commitment, high knowledge and extensive experience, we can offer you reliable legal assistance. Moreover, as you can see above, we can offer the successful defence you search for.

For more information, contact our team at Schlun & Elseven Rechtsanwälte today.