HomeDecision of the Interpol Commission on the case of extradition and search: Ukraine — Monaco — financial crimes
The essence of the problem
The client faced an international search through Interpol based on a request from Ukrainian law enforcement authorities. A “Red Notice” was issued against him, related to accusations of money laundering, tax evasion, and abuse of customs privileges during the import of military goods.
The presence of a Red Notice created serious risks:
- detentions in any country of Interpol,
- extradition to Ukraine,
- movement restrictions,
- refusals in banking and migration services.
The client approached the Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files (CCF) with a request to delete the data as unlawful and disproportionate.
The position of the prosecution and the demands of the state
The Ukrainian side claimed that:
- the client participated in an organized scheme for the supply of military equipment;
- used fake humanitarian aid documents;
- evaded paying taxes on a large amount;
- received illegal income through bank accounts;
- acted under martial law.
On this basis, a warrant for arrest was issued and an international search was initiated through Interpol.
Defense position and key arguments
During the proceedings, the defense built a comprehensive legal position:
1. Insufficiency and inconsistency of accusations
The defense stated that:
- the specific role of the client in the alleged crime has not been disclosed;
- there is no evidence of his personal involvement;
- it has not been proven that he was the one who prepared or forged the documents;
- the accusation contains general wording without specific actions.
2. Violations of procedural order
It was noted that:
- the notification of suspicion was sent with violations;
- in fact, the client did not have the opportunity to defend themselves in a timely manner;
- certain procedural actions were carried out formally.
3. The key argument — refusal of extradition
The most significant circumstance was the decision of the Monaco court, which:
- refused the extradition of the client to Ukraine;
- acknowledged the existence of a real risk of a gross violation of the right to a fair trial;
- pointed to the influence of martial law and an unstable legal situation;
- confirmed the risk of arbitrary deprivation of liberty.
The court explicitly stated that extradition is impossible under conditions where the person may be subjected to unfair criminal prosecution.
Assessment of the Interpol Commission
The Interpol commission conducted a detailed analysis:
- studied Ukraine’s position,
- evaluated the arguments of the defense,
- took into account the decision of the Monaco court,
- checked the compliance of materials with Interpol rules and human rights standards.
Key conclusion of the Commission:
Although formally the grounds for a search remain, the fact of refusal of extradition due to the threat of human rights violations has legal significance and must be obligatorily reflected in the Interpol database.
Final solution
The commission decided:
to acknowledge that the data generally formally complies with Interpol’s rules;
oblige to enter information about the refusal of extradition into the system;
to record that extradition is impossible due to the risk of human rights violations;
thereby significantly limiting the practical application of Red Notice.
This means that:
- other states will take into account Monaco’s refusal;
- detaining a client becomes legally risky;
- the probability of extradition sharply decreases;
- the defense position received official international confirmation.
Output
Despite the formal retention of data in the Interpol system, the defense managed to achieve a key result — international recognition that the extradition of the client violates basic human rights.
This solution significantly strengthens the client’s legal position and effectively blocks attempts at their extradition.
If you are faced with a similar situation
If:
- a Red Notice has been issued against you;
- you are being extradited;
- the case is related to a political, economic, or military context;
- there are risks of human rights violations,
Appealing to experienced lawyers in Interpol cases is critically important.
A properly structured defense allows:
- achieve the imposition of restrictions in Interpol’s databases;
- stop extradition;
- protect freedom of movement;
- maintain legal security even in international search.
If your case is similar — do not postpone the defense.
