{"id":232056,"date":"2026-06-22T13:50:57","date_gmt":"2026-06-22T11:50:57","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/?page_id=232056"},"modified":"2026-06-23T19:08:29","modified_gmt":"2026-06-23T17:08:29","slug":"2018-8","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/decision-excerpts\/2018-8\/","title":{"rendered":"CCF Decision No. 8 (2018)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Tags:<\/strong> Article 2 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a> (torture and mistreatments); Political character
Decision:<\/strong> Not compliant
Data type:<\/strong> Red Notice<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Decision of the Commission<\/h1>\n

Request concerning
[\u2026]<\/p>\n

(Ref. CCF\/ [\u2026])<\/p>\n

(104th session, 24\u201327 April 2018)<\/p>\n

The Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files (the Commission), sitting as the Requests Chamber, composed of:<\/p>\n

Vitalie PIRLOG, Chairperson
Petr GORODOV,
Sanna PALO,
Isaias TRINDADE,
Members,<\/p>\n

Having deliberated in camera during its 104th session, on [\u2026], delivered the following Decision.<\/p>\n

Expand all<\/a> Collapse all<\/a><\/div>\n
\n
<\/span>

I. Procedure<\/h2><\/div>
\n

1. On [\u2026], Mr [\u2026] (the Applicant) lodged a complaint addressed to the Commission. Following the submission of all the required documents in accordance with Article 10 of the Operating Rules of the Commission<\/a>, the request was found admissible, and the Commission informed the applicant thereof on [\u2026].<\/p>\n

2. The National Central Bureau of INTERPOL (NCB) of [\u2026] was initially consulted on the arguments set forth in the complaint, in accordance with Article 5(e,4) of the Rules on the Control of Information and Access to INTERPOL\u2019s files (RCI).<\/p>\n

3. On [\u2026], the Commission requested additional information from the Applicant, but it did not receive any answers to its queries.<\/p>\n

4. As of [\u2026], the Commission continued the study of the Applicant\u2019s request under the Statute of the Commission (Statute) which abrogated and replaced the RCI on that date.<\/p>\n

5. In accordance with Article 34(1) of the Statute<\/a>, the NCB of [\u2026] and INTERPOL General Secretariat (IPSG) were consulted on the arguments set forth in the complaint.<\/p>\n

6. The NCB of [\u2026] h confirmed the validity of the proceedings, and provided answers to the questions raised by the Commission.<\/p>\n

7. Both the Applicant and the NCB source of the data challenged were informed of the fact that the Commission would study the case during its 104th session.<\/p>\n

8. During the study of the Applicant\u2019s case, the Commission consulted the NCB of the [\u2026], in accordance with Article 34(2) of the Statute, on arguments set forth in the complaint.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

II. Facts<\/h2><\/div>
\n

9. The Applicant is a national of [\u2026]. He is a prominent political leader [\u2026], former Member of Parliament and former Minister.<\/p>\n

10. He is the subject of a red notice issued at the request of the NCB of [\u2026] for [\u2026], on the basis of an arrest warrant [\u2026].<\/p>\n

11. The summary of the facts, as recorded in the red notice, is the following: [\u2026].<\/p>\n

12. An extract of the red notice is published on INTERPOL\u2019s website.<\/p>\n

13. On [\u2026], the Applicant was arrested in [\u2026] based on the red notice. However, [\u2026] decided to cancel the searches at the national level on [\u2026], and to release the Applicant who has since then left the country.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

III. The Applicant\u2019s Request<\/h2><\/div>
\n

14. The Applicant requests the deletion of the data concerning him.<\/p>\n

15. He contends in essence that:<\/p>\n

a) the proceedings against him in [\u2026] are based on evidence obtained by torture, in contravention to Article 2 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a>;<\/p>\n

b) the case is of a predominantly political character, in contravention to Article 3 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n

c) the red notice issued against him restricts his fundamental freedoms and cause reputational damage.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

IV. Applicable Legal Framework<\/h2><\/div>
\n

16. Field of competence of the Commission:<\/p>\n