{"id":232072,"date":"2026-06-22T13:50:14","date_gmt":"2026-06-22T11:50:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/?page_id=232072"},"modified":"2026-06-23T19:08:29","modified_gmt":"2026-06-23T17:08:29","slug":"2018-16","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/decision-excerpts\/2018-16\/","title":{"rendered":"CCF Decision No. 16 (2018)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Tags:<\/strong> Purpose of the notice or data; Lawfulness \/ validity of proceedings
Decision:<\/strong> 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

(106th session, 16\u201319 October 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
Leandro DESPOUY,
Petr GORODOV,
Sanna PALO,
Isaias TRINDADE,
Members,<\/p>\n

Having deliberated in camera during its 106th 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], [\u2026] (the Applicant) lodged a complaint addressed to the Commission. Following the submission of all the required documents in accordance with Rule 30 of the Operating Rules of the Commission<\/a>, the request was found admissible, and the Commission informed the Applicant thereof on 5 June 2018.<\/p>\n

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

3. On 4 July 2018, the NCB of [\u2026] confirmed the validity of the proceedings and of the arrest warrant, and provided answers to some of the questions raised by the Commission. On [\u2026], the Commission further consulted the NCB of [\u2026], which provided answers regarding a number of questions that had been posed.<\/p>\n

4. The Commission informed the Applicant on [\u2026] that he is wanted through INTERPOL\u2019s channels by [\u2026], for the charges of [\u2026], and provided the information described in paragraph 9<\/a> below.<\/p>\n

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

6. 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 106th session and invited to share any other information or document with the Commission before [\u2026].<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

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

8. He is the subject of a Red Notice issued at the request of the NCB of [\u2026] Illegal entrepreneurial activity [\u2026] on the basis of an arrest warrant issued [\u2026]. The Red Notice was issued [\u2026] against the Applicant on the basis of this arrest warrant.<\/p>\n

9. 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

10. The Applicant requested the deletion of the data concerning him.<\/p>\n

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

a) the purpose of the Notice was achieved, as his location is known to [\u2026] authorities;<\/p>\n

b) [\u2026] authorities failed to request his extradition from [\u2026];<\/p>\n

c) the proceedings do not respect the principles of due process and human rights \/ Article 2 of INTERPOL\u2019s Constitution<\/a>.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

12. General provisions:<\/p>\n