{"id":232003,"date":"2026-06-22T13:48:37","date_gmt":"2026-06-22T11:48:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/?page_id=232003"},"modified":"2026-06-23T15:55:59","modified_gmt":"2026-06-23T13:55:59","slug":"2023-3","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/decision-excerpts\/2023-3\/","title":{"rendered":"CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)"},"content":{"rendered":"<div class=\"ccf-decision-meta\">\n<p><strong>Tags:<\/strong> Transfer of proceedings; Description of criminal activities<br \/><strong>Decision:<\/strong> Not compliant<br \/><strong>Data type:<\/strong> Diffusion<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<h1 class=\"u-text-center\">Decision of the Commission<br \/>Requests Chamber<\/h1>\n<p class=\"u-text-center\">Request concerning Aaa BBB<\/p>\n<p class=\"u-text-center\">(Ref. CCF\/xxx)<\/p>\n<p class=\"u-text-center\">xxx session<br \/>[date]<\/p>\n<p>The Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files (the Commission), sitting as the Requests Chamber, composed of:<\/p>\n<p>xxx<br \/>Members,<\/p>\n<p>Having deliberated during its xxx session, on [date], delivered the following Decision.<\/p>\n<div class=\"betweendivs\"><a class=\"mybutton blue\" href=\"#\" onclick=\"openall();event.preventDefault();\">Expand all<\/a> <a class=\"mybutton blue\" href=\"#\" onclick=\"closeall();event.preventDefault();\">Collapse all<\/a><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-accordion su-u-trim h-toaccordion includetocloseall\">\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall\" data-anchor=\"section-i\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h2>I. Procedure<\/h2><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>1. On [date], Mr Aaa BBB (the Applicant), lodged a request for the deletion of the information concerning him registered in INTERPOL\u2019s files. On [date], the Commission found the request admissible as per <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/operating-rules\/#rule-30\" title=\"Rule 30 of the Operating Rules of the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files\">Rule 30 of its Operating Rules<\/a> and informed the Applicant thereof.<\/p>\n<p>2. During the study of the Applicant\u2019s case, the Commission consulted the INTERPOL National Central Bureaus (NCB) of CCC and DDD, and the INTERPOL General Secretariat (IPSG) in accordance with <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/statute\/#article-34\" title=\"Article 34 of the Statute of the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files\">Article 34(1) and (2) of the Statute of the Commission<\/a>, on the arguments set forth in the request.<\/p>\n<p>3. The Commission informed the Applicant on [date] that he is wanted through INTERPOL\u2019s channels by CCC, and provided the information described in paragraphs <a href=\"#section-ii\" title=\"Section II of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">5<\/a> and <a href=\"#section-ii\" title=\"Section II of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">6<\/a> below.<\/p>\n<p>4. Both the Applicant and the NCB source of the challenged data were informed of the fact that the Commission would study the case during its xxx session.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-ii\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h2>II. Data Recorded in INTERPOL\u2019s Files<\/h2><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>5. The Applicant, a national of CCC and DDD, is the subject of a Diffusion, circulated on [date], by the NCB of CCC for \u2018extremely large scale fraud\u2019 on the basis of an arrest warrant issued on [date], by the CCC.<\/p>\n<p>6. The facts of the case state the following: \u2018[date]\u2019<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-iii\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h2>III. The Applicant\u2019s Submissions<\/h2><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>7. The Applicant requested the deletion of the data concerning him, contending, in essence, that:<\/p>\n<p class=\"u-indent-1\">a) the data lack a clear description of criminal involvement;<\/p>\n<p class=\"u-indent-1\">b) the Diffusion has no purpose; and<\/p>\n<p class=\"u-indent-1\">c) there are procedural irregularities in the case.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-iv\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h2>IV. Applicable Legal Framework<\/h2><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>8. The Commission considers the following applicable legal framework.<\/p>\n<div class=\"u-indent-1\">8.1. Field of competence of the Commission:<\/div>\n<ul class=\"u-list-indent\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/constitution\/#article-36\" title=\"Article 36 of the Constitution of the ICPO-INTERPOL\">Article 36 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a>,<\/li>\n<li>Articles <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/statute\/#article-3\" title=\"Article 3 of the Statute of the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files\">3(1)(a)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/statute\/#article-33\" title=\"Article 33 of the Statute of the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files\">33(3)<\/a> of the Statute of the Commission.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div class=\"u-indent-1\">8.2. Lawfulness:<\/div>\n<ul class=\"u-list-indent\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/constitution\/#article-2\" title=\"Article 2 of the Constitution of the ICPO-INTERPOL\">Article 2(1) of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a>,<\/li>\n<li>Articles <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-11\" title=\"Article 11 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">11(2)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-34\" title=\"Article 34 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">34(1)<\/a> of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data (RPD).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div class=\"u-indent-1\">8.3. Extradition issues:<\/div>\n<ul class=\"u-list-indent\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/constitution\/#article-31\" title=\"Article 31 of the Constitution of the ICPO-INTERPOL\">Article 31 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a>,<\/li>\n<li>Articles <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-10\" title=\"Article 10 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">10<\/a>, 34(1), <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-81\" title=\"Article 81 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">81<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-82\" title=\"Article 82 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">82<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-84\" title=\"Article 84 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">84(2)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-87\" title=\"Article 87 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">87(b)<\/a> of the RPD.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<div class=\"u-indent-1\">8.4. Clear description of criminal involvement:<\/div>\n<ul class=\"u-list-indent\">\n<li>Articles 10(2)(a), <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-12\" title=\"Article 12 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">12<\/a>, <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-35\" title=\"Article 35 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">35(1)<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-97\" title=\"Article 97 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">97(1)(a)<\/a>, and 97(2) of the RPD,<\/li>\n<li>IPSG\u2019s standards for the application of the RPD.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<h2 class=\"su-spoiler-title ec-fake-spoiler-heading\" id=\"section-v\">V. Analysis of the Case<\/h2>\n<h3 class=\"su-spoiler-title ec-fake-spoiler-heading u-indent-1\" id=\"section-v-a\">A. Procedural Irregularities and Purpose<\/h3>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall u-indent-2 su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-v-a-a\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h4>a) Submissions of the Applicant<\/h4><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>9. The Applicant contented that there are several procedural irregularities, in particular a search of [\u2026] on [date], in his absence, and without the presence of a member of the CCC Bar. He also complained that the arrest warrant wrongly mentioned he fled the country to avoid prosecution. In [date], he left before any proceedings were initiated, first to EEE, based on his doctor\u2019s recommendation because of serious health issues, which worsened in [date] after a fall. There, he underwent rehabilitation with [\u2026]. However, he had to undergo another surgery in DDD, where his relatives recommended a surgeon. He remained there [date] and continues to require regular care and rehabilitation sessions. The Courts failed to assess the documents provided concerning his state of health. To support his contentions, he provided copies of medical reports confirming the existence of a disability since [date] and the accident of [date].<\/p>\n<p>10. He stated that the data serve no purpose as no extradition was requested by CCC, despite knowing his location in DDD since [date]. Moreover, he voluntarily surrendered to DDD authorities and was detained, which demonstrates his willingness to cooperate with the investigative authorities. Finally, he argued that CCC authorities refused to transfer the proceedings to DDD without a clear basis.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall u-indent-2 su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-v-a-b\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h4>b) Submissions of the NCB of CCC (NCB source of the Data)<\/h4><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>11. The NCB confirmed that the proceedings and the arrest warrant were still valid.<\/p>\n<p>12. It reported that the [date] search of the Applicant\u2019s [\u2026] was carried out based on the decision dated [date] of the [\u2026] Court of CCC, and led in accordance with the requirements of the CCC criminal procedure legislation. No violations occurred during the preliminary investigation.<\/p>\n<p>13. On [date] the relevant investigative unit issued [\u2026] and on the same day his name was added to the [\u2026] wanted list because his whereabouts were unknown. Being later located outside of CCC, it was not possible to send him the written notification. However, since [date], the Applicant was reliably informed about the pre-investigation check against him [\u2026], as well as about the subsequent criminal case initiated against him. It is to avoid criminal liability, that he left CCC.<\/p>\n<p>14. The Applicant being a national of both CCC and DDD, the investigating authority considered sending a criminal case to court according to Article [\u2026] of the CCC Criminal Procedure Code. It also considered sending copies of the criminal case file to the competent DDD authorities, without a request for criminal public prosecution, to take measures in accordance with DDD legislation. No transfer of proceedings occurred because the Applicant also holds CCC nationality.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall u-indent-2 su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-v-a-c\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h4>c) Information From the NCB of DDD<\/h4><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>15. The NCB of DDD reported that the Applicant was detained on [date]. Considering his DDD citizenship he was released, and his case was not presented to the courts.<\/p>\n<p>16. The CCC was informed that the Applicant\u2019s extradition was precluded under DDD law because he is an DDD citizen. It was suggested to transfer the criminal proceedings to the competent authorities of DDD. The CCC authorities informed the DDD that the case could not be transferred because the Applicant is also a CCC citizen. No formal request for extradition was received from CCC.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall u-indent-2 su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-v-a-d\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h4>d) Findings of the Commission<\/h4><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>17. The Commission reviews the Applicant\u2019s claims of the existence of several procedural irregularities in his case in CCC, which raise the question of compliance of the data with <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/constitution\/#article-2\" title=\"Article 2 of the Constitution of the ICPO-INTERPOL\">Article 2 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a> and <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-11\" title=\"Article 11 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">Article 11 of the RPD<\/a>. It recalls that the simple assertion of possible procedural irregularities cannot rise to the level of an Article 2 violation.<\/p>\n<p>18. Here, the NCB provided general answers to the issues raised by the Applicant, regarding the search of his office (<a href=\"#section-v-a-b\" title=\"Section V.A.b of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">paragraph 12<\/a>), his notification and the fact that being informed of the investigation against [\u2026], he left CCC to avoid prosecution (<a href=\"#section-v-a-b\" title=\"Section V.A.b of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">paragraph 13<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>19. While there are elements to support the fact that the Diffusion\u2019s underlying arrest warrant, of which the NCB provided a copy, is valid, there remain doubts on the existence of procedural irregularities in particular regarding the search of the Applicant\u2019s office. However, in view of the complexity of the case and the interdependence of arguments raised in relation to other legal issues, the Commission decides not to make a final pronouncement on the compliance of the data challenged at this stage, and to continue to study the Applicant\u2019s additional arguments.<\/p>\n<p>20. Under <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-99\" title=\"Article 99 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">Article 99 of the RPD<\/a>, the purpose of this Diffusion is not only to locate the subject, but also to request his provisional arrest in view of extradition. The information provided by the NCB of CCC, and confirmed by the NCB of DDD, highlights that as an DDD national the Applicant cannot be extradited from DDD. Therefore, this argument is not sufficient to consider that there is no willingness of the authorities of CCC to respect their obligations under applicable law and to request the extradition of the Applicant, if possible.<\/p>\n<p>21. Regarding the lack of transfer of proceedings from CCC to DDD, this question can be seen as a form of international cooperation as it would increase the efficiency and effectiveness of a prosecution in a country that is initiating proceedings, in lieu of extradition. However, the issue that arises in consideration of these transfers of proceedings is whether domestic laws permit the transfer of criminal proceedings to a foreign jurisdiction and, if so, under what conditions. In the present case, the CCC authorities clearly stated that as the Applicant is a CCC national there can be no transfer of proceedings in this case, and none was requested. These matters of transfers of proceedings are best decided by national or regional courts.<\/p>\n<p>22. Therefore, the Commission finds there is no reason to doubt that CCC authorities intend to fulfil the purpose of the Diffusion and that it still has a valid purpose in compliance with the applicable rules as described in <a href=\"#section-iv\" title=\"Section IV of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">paragraph 8.3<\/a> above.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<h3 class=\"su-spoiler-title ec-fake-spoiler-heading u-indent-1\" id=\"section-v-b\">B. Lack of Criminal Elements<\/h3>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall u-indent-2 su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-v-b-a\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h4>a) Submissions of the Applicant<\/h4><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>23. The Applicant submitted that the case materials demonstrate that, [\u2026] he [\u2026] had no link to the crime. [\u2026].<\/p>\n<p>24. [\u2026]<\/p>\n<p>25. His alleged accomplice, [\u2026] was convicted and sentenced to [\u2026] years of imprisonment on [\u2026]. In her statement of [date], a copy of which was provided by the Applicant, [\u2026] did not mention the Applicant. She only implicated him later, as [\u2026] refused to testify under the right to remain silent. Accordingly, he should not be accused in a crime he was not aware of, and that was committed by third persons.<\/p>\n<p>26. He added that the interrogation protocols demonstrate that the [\u2026] were transferred and paid to [\u2026], who is the one who provided the alleged forged decision [\u2026]. The Applicant\u2019s name was cited only based on the witness testimonies of [\u2026]. No other material proof was provided to implicate the Applicant in any criminal act.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall u-indent-2 su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-v-b-b\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h4>b) Submissions of the NCB of CCC (NCB source of the Data)<\/h4><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>27. The NCB reported that, from [date] to [date], the Applicant, as [\u2026]. The Applicant and [\u2026] received [\u2026] and disposed of them at their own discretion.<\/p>\n<p>28. The Applicant\u2019s involvement is not only based on the testimony of [\u2026], it is also confirmed by the testimony of the two victims, two witnesses, the results of operational and search activities, and other evidence contained in the materials of the criminal case.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<div class=\"su-spoiler su-spoiler-style-default su-spoiler-icon-plus h-toaccordion includetocloseall u-indent-2 su-spoiler-closed\" data-anchor=\"section-v-b-c\" data-scroll-offset=\"50\" data-anchor-in-url=\"yes\"><div class=\"su-spoiler-title\" tabindex=\"0\" role=\"button\"><span class=\"su-spoiler-icon\"><\/span><h4>c) Findings of the Commission<\/h4><\/div><div class=\"su-spoiler-content su-u-clearfix su-u-trim\">\n<p>29. With respect to the facts of this case, the Applicant disputes the factual allegations set out in the charging documents (paragraphs <a href=\"#section-v-b-a\" title=\"Section V.B.a of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">23<\/a> and <a href=\"#section-v-b-a\" title=\"Section V.B.a of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">24<\/a>), and the NCB in turn disputes the factual allegations set out by the Applicant before the Commission (paragraphs <a href=\"#section-v-b-b\" title=\"Section V.B.b of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">27<\/a> to <a href=\"#section-v-b-b\" title=\"Section V.B.b of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">28<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>30. The Commission is not empowered to conduct an investigation, to weigh evidence, nor to make a determination on the facts or merits of a case; such is the function of the competent national authorities. However, under <a href=\"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/rules-processing-data\/#article-99\" title=\"Article 99 of INTERPOL\u2019s Rules on the Processing of Data\">Article 99(2) of the RPD<\/a>, the circulation of a Diffusion is conditioned by the provision of sufficient elements describing the criminal activity underlying the case, and the personal involvement of the wanted individual that would link him to the charges. In conducting its review, the Commission relies on the elements provided by the parties. For this evaluation, it is essential that the NCB\u2019s information is concrete and specific, in the sense that it must clearly identify the role of the Applicant, his specific criminal actions, the time and the means to commit the infraction. It should be precise, detailed and demonstrate, when relevant, a benefit or the intention to commit the offense.<\/p>\n<p>31. Here, the information provided by the NCB regarding the Applicant\u2019s personal criminal acts are not described precisely contrary to those of [\u2026], nor are there clear elements provided by the NCB that ascertain the Applicant was aware of the falsification of documents by [\u2026], and that he received funds beyond the fee for [\u2026]. It makes general statements as to the existence of evidence against the Applicant (<a href=\"#section-v-b-b\" title=\"Section V.B.b of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">paragraph 28<\/a>) without addressing his relevant submissions (paragraphs <a href=\"#section-v-b-a\" title=\"Section V.B.a of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">25<\/a> and <a href=\"#section-v-b-a\" title=\"Section V.B.a of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">26<\/a>).<\/p>\n<p>32. Therefore, the Commission finds that the data are not compliant with Articles under <a href=\"#section-iv\" title=\"Section IV of INTERPOL\u2019s CCF Decision No. 3 (2023)\">paragraph 8.4<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p class=\"u-text-center\">For these reasons, the Commission<\/p>\n<p>Decides that the data concerning the Applicant are not compliant with INTERPOL\u2019s rules applicable to the processing of personal data, and that they shall be deleted from INTERPOL\u2019s files.<\/p>\n<p>Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files<\/p>\n<p>Secretariat to the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<script id=\"ec-fake-spoiler-scroll-fix\">\n(function(){\n  if (window.ecFakeSpoilerScrollFixReady) { return; }\n  window.ecFakeSpoilerScrollFixReady = true;\n  function hasClass(node, cls) {\n    if (!node) { return false; }\n    if (!node.classList) { return false; }\n    return node.classList.contains(cls);\n  }\n  function nextSpoiler(fake) {\n    var node = fake.nextElementSibling;\n    while (node) {\n      if (hasClass(node, \"su-spoiler\")) { return node; }\n      node = node.nextElementSibling;\n    }\n    return null;\n  }\n  function spoilerAnchor(spoiler) {\n    if (!spoiler) { return \"\"; }\n    if (spoiler.hasAttribute(\"data-anchor\")) { return spoiler.getAttribute(\"data-anchor\") || \"\"; }\n    if (spoiler.hasAttribute(\"id\")) { return spoiler.getAttribute(\"id\") || \"\"; }\n    return \"\";\n  }\n  function titleFor(spoiler) {\n    if (!spoiler) { return null; }\n    return spoiler.querySelector(\".su-spoiler-title\");\n  }\n  function clickTitle(spoiler) {\n    var title = titleFor(spoiler);\n    if (!title) { return; }\n    title.dispatchEvent(new MouseEvent(\"click\", { bubbles: true, cancelable: true, view: window }));\n  }\n  function ensureOpen(spoiler) {\n    if (!spoiler) { return; }\n    if (hasClass(spoiler, \"su-spoiler-closed\")) { clickTitle(spoiler); }\n  }\n  function offsetFor(spoiler) {\n    var value = \"\";\n    if (spoiler) {\n      if (spoiler.hasAttribute(\"data-scroll-offset\")) { value = spoiler.getAttribute(\"data-scroll-offset\") || \"\"; }\n    }\n    var parsed = parseInt(value, 10);\n    if (isNaN(parsed)) { return 50; }\n    return parsed;\n  }\n  function scrollToFake(fake, spoiler) {\n    var y = fake.getBoundingClientRect().top + window.pageYOffset - offsetFor(spoiler);\n    window.scrollTo(0, Math.max(0, y));\n  }\n  function handleHash() {\n    var raw = window.location.hash || \"\";\n    if (!raw) { return; }\n    var id = decodeURIComponent(raw.replace(\/^#\/, \"\"));\n    var fake = document.getElementById(id);\n    if (!hasClass(fake, \"ec-fake-spoiler-heading\")) { return; }\n    var spoiler = nextSpoiler(fake);\n    ensureOpen(spoiler);\n    setTimeout(function(){ scrollToFake(fake, spoiler); }, 0);\n  }\n  var headings = document.querySelectorAll(\".ec-fake-spoiler-heading\");\n  var spoilers = document.querySelectorAll(\".su-spoiler\");\n  for (var i = 0; i < headings.length; i += 1) {\n    var heading = headings.item(i);\n    var spoiler = nextSpoiler(heading);\n    spoilerAnchor(spoiler);\n    heading.setAttribute(\"tabindex\", \"0\");\n    heading.addEventListener(\"click\", function(event){\n      event.preventDefault();\n      clickTitle(nextSpoiler(this));\n    });\n    heading.addEventListener(\"keydown\", function(event){\n      if (event.key === \"Enter\") { event.preventDefault(); clickTitle(nextSpoiler(this)); }\n      if (event.key === \" \") { event.preventDefault(); clickTitle(nextSpoiler(this)); }\n    });\n  }\n  window.addEventListener(\"hashchange\", handleHash);\n  if (spoilers.length < 0) { return; }\n  if (document.readyState === \"loading\") {\n    document.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\", handleHash);\n  } else {\n    handleHash();\n  }\n})();\n<\/script>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Tags: Transfer of proceedings; Description of criminal activitiesDecision: Not compliantData type: Diffusion Decision of the CommissionRequests Chamber Request concerning Aaa BBB (Ref. CCF\/xxx) xxx session[date] The Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files (the&#46;&#46;&#46;","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":232640,"parent":230797,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-232003","page","type-page","status-publish","has-post-thumbnail","hentry"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/232003","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=232003"}],"version-history":[{"count":16,"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/232003\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":234641,"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/232003\/revisions\/234641"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/230797"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/232640"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=232003"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=232003"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=232003"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}