Thousands of Interpol Red Notices are issued each year. Even if a person is not arrested pursuant to a Red Notice, the notice itself will cause considerable difficulties, preventing them from travelling and causing significant reputational damage. These FAQs look at how you can challenge an Interpol Red Notice and get it deleted.
What is a Red Notice?
A Red Notice (sometimes referred to as a “Red Corner Notice”) is essentially a request by Interpol on behalf of one member state to all other member states to locate a suspect or convicted person and take steps to facilitate their surrender to the requesting state, usually through extradition proceedings. The legal effect of a Red Notice differs between member states and not every country will treat it as a valid arrest warrant. The practical effect, however, will invariably be the same: international travel becomes extremely risky and, if attempted, is very likely to lead to the individual concerned being stopped and the requesting state being notified of their location. An extradition request will likely then follow. A Red Notice is also likely to bring reputational damage, especially if details are published on Interpol’s website, and may result in the closure of bank accounts.
What are the problems with Red Notices?
Interpol is required to review all requests for Red Notices before publication to ensure they comply with its own rules and principles. Nevertheless, with limited resources and often limited knowledge of the facts on the ground, this review can be cursory. This lack of proper scrutiny allows some member states to abuse the Red Notice system and use it to facilitate improper activities, such as persecution of political opponents, contrary to Interpol's own rules. Increasingly, Interpol Red Notices are also abused by those who seek to apply pressure to opponents in commercial litigation.
How do I find out if there is a Red Notice against me?
Although Interpol's website has a search facility for Red Notices, only a small number are published online. The vast majority are never made public and many of those subject to a Red Notice only find out about it when crossing a border.
There is, however, a procedure that allows a person to request Interpol to confirm if there is a Red Notice against them (and/or whether Interpol holds any other data concerning them) and, if so, to disclose details of the underlying criminal case to which the Red Notice relates. We regularly make these applications on behalf of our clients.
How can you challenge a Red Notice?
- Pre-emptive letter
We are often approached by people who know or suspect that a member state will soon be approaching Interpol to request publication of a Red Notice. In such circumstances, it is possible to send a pre-emptive letter to Interpol ahead of the requesting state making contact, setting out the reasons why publication of the Red Notice would violate Interpol's rules.
- Request for deletion with full representations
In other cases, an individual might not have advance warning and may have no knowledge about a member state’s intentions until after the Red Notice has been published. In these circumstances, a request for deletion can be submitted to the Commission for the Control of Interpol's Files (“CCF”). The CCF is an independent body within Interpol which ensures that all personal data processed by the organisation complies with its own rules. Requests for deletion are usually more detailed than a pre-emptive letter and may be supported by evidence, such as expert reports commenting on the specific case or country reports produced by NGOs. The CCF’s Requests Chamber meets every three months and will consider the representations at one of its meetings.
What arguments can be made when challenging a Red Notice?
The two most important documents for the purpose of challenging a Red Notice are Interpol's Rules on the Processing of Data (“RPD”) and its constitution. The RPD set out the minimum requirements for publication of a Red Notice, which include ‘a succinct and clear description of the criminal activities of the wanted person’. This is often formulated as: ‘is there evidence demonstrating the possible effective personal participation of the individual in the criminal activities?’ Interpol will not conduct a detailed assessment of the credibility of the allegations, but if it can be shown that the case is so lacking in any substance that it fails to cross this threshold, the Red Notice should be deleted. The RPD also prohibit publication of a Red Notice in certain circumstances, for example where the offence originates from ’a violation of laws or regulations of an administrative nature or deriving from private disputes’.
Non-compliance with Interpol's constitution offers another basis to argue for deletion. Article 2 requires Interpol to act in accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Human rights arguments will often look at how the subject will be treated if the Red Notice is acted upon and they are extradited to the requesting state. Are they likely to be held in a prison with poor conditions or be subjected to torture? Are there serious concerns about their ability to receive a fair trial? Article 3 forbids Interpol from undertaking any intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character. This is relied upon by those who are targeted because of their religious or political beliefs and where the criminal case against them is a manifestation of this persecution. Reliance on Article 3 is most effective if combined with an argument that there is no evidence of possible effective participation; the absence of such evidence highlights the political or religious motivation.
Further information
You may also be interested in reading our previous blog "Interpol Red Notices and how to deal with them" for further details. Should you have any questions, please contact a member of our criminal litigation team.
We have a wealth of experience of representing clients who are subject to Red Notices and we are often instructed by high profile individuals and professionals who are targeted by political opponents and adverse parties in hostile civil litigation. We have a comprehensive understanding of the functioning of Interpol and can advise on all related issues, such as diffusion notices, deletion of Red Notice extracts from Interpol’s website and further requests for removal of a Red Notice following a negative decision.
Ed Smyth
Partner
Sophie Wood
Partner
Will Hayes
Legal Director
Matthew Burn
Senior Associate
Edward Jones
Senior Associate
Maeve Keenan
Senior Associate
Áine Kervick
Senior Associate
Fred Allen
Senior Associate
Emily Elliott
Associate
Fiona Haddadeen
Associate
Alice Trotter
Associate
Latest blogs & news
From Certificates to Belief Statements: The CPS and the Limits of Forum Bar Intervention
The CPS’s June 2025 guidance on the forum bar marks a decisive narrowing of the circumstances in which prosecutor’s belief statements may be issued. Such statements (by which a domestic prosecutor expresses the view that the UK is not the most appropriate jurisdiction for prosecution) have often featured in litigation under sections 19B and 83A of the Extradition Act 2003.
A System Under Strain: Why It's Time to Rethink the UK’s Approach to Extradition and International Cooperation
As global crime evolves and political landscapes shift, the UK’s legal frameworks for international cooperation and extradition are showing their age. In a new blog, Rebecca Niblock explores the Criminal Law Reform Now Network (CLRNN) Scoping Review (June 2025) which makes a compelling case: the time for reform is now.
INTERPOL: Priorities for the new Secretary General
We recently wrote about the history and future of INTERPOL as it marked its 100th anniversary at the end of 2023. We observed then that there appears to be an increasing appetite for change at the agency, with some notable reforms taking place over the past decade.
Part 2 - Still a ‘Special Relationship’? The ‘forum bar’ and the development of the extradition relationship between the UK and the USA
This blog is part two of a two-part blog series. In part one we discussed the forum bar to extradition and the relevant case law of extradition proceedings, following a request from the USA to the UK, in which the forum bar has been successfully argued.
INTERPOL: Looking to the next century
As INTERPOL celebrates a milestone anniversary in 2023, we consider some of the underlying issues with the Red Notice system and what this means for the next 100 years.
Extradition to the UK blocked
A European court recently blocked the extradition of an alleged drug dealer due to concerns over the protection of his human rights in the requesting state. Perhaps not an unusual decision at first glance. But what makes this case stand out is that the requesting state was the United Kingdom.
INTERPOL – new voice in responsible AI innovation?
In October 2022, INTERPOL announced the creation of its Metaverse “twin” – a virtual Headquarters that would, as a first step, serve as an immersive training space for law enforcement professionals. Almost 10 months later INTERPOL and the United Nations Interregional Crime and Justice Research Institute (UNICRI) unveiled their joint “Toolkit for Responsible AI Innovation in Law Enforcement” (the “Toolkit”), a guide for law enforcement professionals worldwide on developing and using AI responsibly.
Dual citizenship and asylum claims: an increasingly common challenge
This blog post examines the issue of how having more than one citizenship impacts asylum claims in the UK.
New INTERPOL data offers some hope of protection against Red Notice abuse
In an encouraging step towards improving transparency around Red Notices and diffusions, INTERPOL has published important data showing the number of alerts that were issued each year between 2017 and 2021 and how many INTERPOL deleted or refused to issue during the same period.
When is an extradition decision binding?
When is an extradition decision binding? Recent case law on double jeopardy as a de-fence against extradition
International Criminal Law Quarterly Round-Up: Q2 2022
This quarterly international criminal law update provides a summary of the news stories in the period April – June 2022. The relevance of international criminal law continues to be highlighted by the war in Ukraine. As events have unfolded, we have covered relevant developments below along with a number of other international law news stories.
The rule of law in Ukraine during martial law: Review of changes to the criminal process
We are delighted to present, as a guest blog, the thoughts and views of Dr Valentyn Gvozdiy, managing partner of Golaw in Kyiv. Dr Gvozdiy outlines the significant changes to criminal procedure that have been heralded by the Russian invasion of his country and the subsequent adoption of martial law.
Cross-Border Criminal Law Conference 2022: Individual and Corporate Accountability for International Crimes
On Thursday 5 May, Kingsley Napley hosted the 4th annual Cross-Border Criminal Law Conference, which focused on individual and corporate accountability for international crimes.
National Security and Investment Act 2021 – an expansive approach to liability
Whilst it is anticipated that prosecutions under the National Security and Investment Act 2021 (‘the Act’) will be exceptionally rare, the criminal sanctions set out in it are explicitly framed to create a “sufficiently robust deterrent to ensure compliance.” The provisions punish corporates and individual officers who connive or consent to commit an offence, as well as individual officers who are negligent (s.36). In addition, they are also extra-territorial (s.52), meaning that the scope of liability is particularly wide-ranging.
KN's Cross Border Criminal Law Conference on 5 May 2022 | Panel Discussion: 20 years since the Pinochet case – the current state of universal jurisdiction in the UK
The Prime Minister recently committed the UK’s support to achieving justice in respect of the war crimes allegations arising out of the Ukraine conflict. The conflict and associated allegations raise questions over the UK’s commitment and ability to bring prosecutions under the doctrine of “universal jurisdiction”. Universal jurisdiction describes the jurisdiction that is available in the national courts of many countries to prosecute individuals for the most serious international crimes, even if those crimes occurred abroad and neither the defendants nor victims have any connection to that country. Why only a few such prosecutions have taken place in the UK will be the topic of one of two panel discussions at Kingsley Napley’s Cross Border Criminal Law Conference on 5 May 2022.
International Criminal Law Quarterly Round-Up: Q1 2022
This quarterly international criminal law update provides a summary of the news stories in the period January – March 2022. The relevance of international criminal law has been tragically highlighted by the current events in the Ukraine. This fast moving event has been covered below, along with a number of other international criminal law updates.
Is Russia now facing suspension from INTERPOL?
On 28 February 2022, the UK Home Secretary Priti Patel announced to parliament that the UK would be ‘leading all international efforts’ to suspend Russia’s membership of INTERPOL.
This came moments before the Ukrainian minister of internal affairs, Denis Monastyrsky, made a public statement demanding Russia’s immediate expulsion from the organisation for “violating its basic principles and massive misuse of tools and services to cover up its crimes and persecute political enemies, particularly in Ukraine.”
Extradition post-Brexit: the Irish questions answered
On 16 November the CJEU delivered its judgment following the publication of the Advocate General’s opinion on the UK-Ireland extradition questions which we wrote about here. The decision concerned the mechanisms for extradition to the UK from Ireland in two scenarios (1) under the terms of the withdrawal agreement from 1 February to 31 December 2020 and (2) under the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement (“TCA”) from 1 January 2021.
The judgment confirms the AG’s Opinion that Ireland is bound by the withdrawal agreement and the TCA (“the agreements”) in respect of extradition arrangements with the UK and accordingly extradition from Ireland to the UK post-Brexit will continue under those terms.
Extradition post-Brexit: the Irish questions
On 9 November 2021 Advocate General Kokott handed down her opinion in respect of Case C-479/21 concerning Mr Sn and Mr Sd following a reference from the Irish Supreme Court which was made on 3 August 2021. Her opinion stated that the provisions of the Withdrawal Agreement and TCA which ensure the continuation of the European arrest warrant regime in respect of warrants issued by the United Kingdom (“UK”) during the transition period are binding on Ireland.
Extradition post-Brexit: plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose?
Rebecca Niblock and Edward Grange examine the key changes & similarities to extradition law following Brexit. The introduction of new surrender arrangements under the EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement. Changes effected under the Extradition (Provisional Arrest) Act 2020.
