{"id":232082,"date":"2026-06-22T13:52:43","date_gmt":"2026-06-22T11:52:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/?page_id=232082"},"modified":"2026-06-23T15:56:09","modified_gmt":"2026-06-23T13:56:09","slug":"2017-3","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/decision-excerpts\/2017-3\/","title":{"rendered":"CCF Decision No. 3 (2017)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Tags:<\/strong> Political character; Lack of action for extradition
Decision:<\/strong> Compliant with update
Data type:<\/strong> Red Notice<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Decision of the Commission<\/h1>\n

The Commission for the Control of INTERPOL\u2019s Files (the Commission), \u2026<\/p>\n

Having deliberated in camera, delivered the following Decision. \u2026<\/p>\n

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

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

1. On \u2026, the Requesting Party (hereafter \u2018the RP\u2019) lodged a complaint addressed to the Commission. Following 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 him on \u2026<\/p>\n

2. In accordance with article 5(e,4) of the Rules on the Control of Information and Access to INTERPOL\u2019s files, the National Central Bureau of INTERPOL (NCB) of Country A was consulted on the arguments set forth in the complaint.<\/p>\n

3. On \u2026, the NCB of Country A confirmed the validity of the proceedings and of the arrest warrant, and provided answers to the questions raised by the Commission.<\/p>\n

4. The Commission informed the RP on \u2026 that he is wanted for prosecution through INTERPOL\u2019s channels by Country A, for the charges of\u2026<\/p>\n

5. The RP was also informed of the fact that the Commission would study his complaint during its \u2026 session, and was invited to share any other information or document with the Commission before \u2026<\/p>\n

6. The Commission also consulted the NCB of Country B, the NCB of the Country C, and the NCB of Country D, on issues raised by the request.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

7. The RP is a national of Country B.<\/p>\n

8. He used to be residing in Country A, and has family connections to the former President \u2026. He has held senior positions in companies linked with the former government of Country A, until he fled the country in \u2026 after the fall of former President \u2026.<\/p>\n

9. He is the subject of a Red Notice issued at the request of the NCB of Country A for \u2026, on the basis of an arrest warrant issued by the General Prosecutor\u2019s Office on \u2026.<\/p>\n

10. The summary of the facts, as recorded in the Red Notice, is the following: \u2018\u2026\u2019<\/p>\n

11. On \u2026, the RP was arrested upon arrival at the airport in Country C, on the basis of the Red Notice. He was detained shortly, and then released by Country C authorities.<\/p>\n

12. On \u2026, the RP was arrested at the airport in Country D, on the basis of the Red Notice. He was detained shortly, and then released on bail, pending the outcome of the extradition proceedings.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

13. The RP requested access to the data concerning him, and its deletion.<\/p>\n

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

1) the case is of a predominantly political character,<\/p>\n

2) Country A authorities have repeatedly failed to request his extradition, despite knowing his whereabouts, and therefore the Red Notice has lost its purpose.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

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