{"id":232070,"date":"2026-06-22T13:50:14","date_gmt":"2026-06-22T11:50:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/?page_id=232070"},"modified":"2026-06-23T15:56:02","modified_gmt":"2026-06-23T13:56:02","slug":"2018-15","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/decision-excerpts\/2018-15\/","title":{"rendered":"CCF Decision No. 15 (2018)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Tags:<\/strong> Article 2 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a> (torture and mistreatments); Lack of action for extradition
Decision:<\/strong> Conditions for revision met, 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

(105th session, 3\u20135 July 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 105th 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. The Commission studied a previous request by the Applicant for the deletion of the data concerning him registered in INTERPOL\u2019s files during its [\u2026] session [\u2026]. It concluded, in light of the information provided by the Applicant and by the INTERPOL National Central Bureau (NCB) of the [\u2026] and by the NCB of [\u2026], that the data challenged were compliant with INTERPOL\u2019s rules. On [\u2026], the Commission informed the Applicant accordingly.<\/p>\n

2. On [\u2026], the Applicant submitted an application for the revision of the Commission\u2019s previous conclusions further to Article 42 of the Statute of the Commission<\/a> (Statute). Following the submission of all the required documents in accordance with Rule 30 of the Operating Rules of the Commission<\/a>, the application for revision was found admissible, and the Commission informed the Applicant thereof on [\u2026].<\/p>\n

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

4. During the study of the Applicant\u2019s case, the Commission consulted the NCB of [\u2026], in accordance with Article 34(2) of the Statute, on specific issues raised in the application for revision.<\/p>\n

5. Both the Applicant and the NCB source of the data challenged were informed of the fact that the Commission would study the application for revision during its 105th session.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

6. The Applicant is a national of [\u2026].<\/p>\n

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

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

<\/span>

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

9. The Applicant requests the revision of the Commission\u2019s previous conclusions, and the deletion of the data concerning him.<\/p>\n

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

a) [\u2026] authorities have denied his extradition to [\u2026];<\/p>\n

b) His fundamental human rights would be violated in case of return to [\u2026] and therefore the processing of the data in INTERPOL\u2019s files is not compliant with the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights<\/a> and with Article 2 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a>;<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

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