{"id":232108,"date":"2026-06-22T13:51:45","date_gmt":"2026-06-22T11:51:45","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/?page_id=232108"},"modified":"2026-06-23T19:40:33","modified_gmt":"2026-06-23T17:40:33","slug":"2017-16","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/europeancourt.org\/en\/documents\/interpol\/commission-control-files\/decision-excerpts\/2017-16\/","title":{"rendered":"CCF Decision No. 16 (2017)"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Tags:<\/strong> Family matter; Lawfulness \/ validity of proceedings
Decision:<\/strong> Not compliant
Data type:<\/strong> Red Notice; Yellow Notice<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Decision of the Commission<\/h1>\n

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

(102nd session, 24 to 27 October 2017)<\/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 102nd 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], Ms [\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 her on [\u2026].<\/p>\n

2. On [\u2026], the Applicant lodged a complaint concerning her sons, [\u2026] (together the Children) 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 the Applicant on [\u2026].<\/p>\n

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

4. On [\u2026], the NCB of [\u2026] was reminded to reply to the Commission\u2019s queries. The NCB was also informed that without a reply by [\u2026], the Commission might well decide that the information shall be blocked or deleted, as it would not be in a position to ensure that the information concerning these persons was processed in conformity with the rules and regulations applicable to the Organization.<\/p>\n

5. In the absence of the confirmation of the validity of suits, and of answers to the questions raised by the Commission within the set deadline, the Commission decided that access by INTERPOL Member Countries to the data concerning the Applicant and the Children shall be blocked pending further study of the files.<\/p>\n

6. The INTERPOL General Secretariat was informed of this Decision and blocked access to the data concerning the Applicant and the Children on [\u2026].<\/p>\n

7. On the same day, the NCB of [\u2026] was informed of the Commission\u2019s decision and that the data would be deleted if no appropriate reply was received to the Commission\u2019s queries. It was invited to address the issues raised by the case. On [\u2026], the NCB made communications to the Commission in reply to its queries.<\/p>\n

8. The Commission informed the Applicant and her Children that there were data concerning them registered in INTERPOL\u2019s files by [\u2026], as described in paragraphs 13<\/a> to 16<\/a> below. The Applicant was also informed of the Decision of the Commission to block the access to the data concerned, and of its implementation by the INTERPOL General Secretariat<\/p>\n

9. 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 102nd session.<\/p>\n

10. During the study of the Applicant and the Children\u2019s cases, in accordance with Article 34(1)\/(2) of the CCF Statute, the NCB of [\u2026] and the INTERPOL General Secretariat were consulted on arguments set forth in the complaint.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

11. The Applicant and the Children are nationals of [\u2026].<\/p>\n

12. [\u2026]<\/p>\n

13. The Applicant is the subject of a red notice issued at the request of [\u2026] for Parental abduction, on the basis of an arrest warrant issued on [\u2026] by the Investigative Judge in [\u2026].<\/p>\n

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

15. Child 1 is the subject of a yellow notice to be located, issued at the request of [\u2026]. The Circumstances of Disappearance or Discovery, as recorded in the yellow notice, are the following: [\u2026]<\/p>\n

16. Child 2 is the subject of a yellow notice to be located, issued at the request of [\u2026]. The Circumstances of Disappearance or Discovery, as recorded in the yellow notice, are the following: [\u2026]<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

17. The Applicant requested the deletion of the data concerning her and the Children.<\/p>\n

18. She contends in essence that:<\/p>\n

a) [\u2026]<\/p>\n

b) The case is of a family\/private nature,<\/p>\n

c) The proceedings are unlawful,<\/p>\n

d) The proceedings do not respect the principles of due process and human rights.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/div>\n

<\/span>

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

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