Extradition Between UAE and Netherlands

If an international arrest warrant has been issued against you or your client and you are currently in the UAE, the situation demands immediate and professional action. The threat of arrest and transfer to EU jurisdiction became very real after the bilateral UAE extradition treaty Netherlands entered into force in 2023. However, the existence of a treaty does not mean extradition will happen automatically. Both legal systems contain protective mechanisms — procedural, humanitarian, and political. Applying them effectively requires specialized attorneys on both the requesting and requested sides. Delay in such cases is unacceptable: every hour counts from the moment of detention.

Prior to 2021, cooperation between the Netherlands and the UAE in the field of extradition was inconsistent: requests were handled on the basis of reciprocity, without clear treaty regulation, which often turned the process into lengthy diplomatic negotiations. In practice, each case was decided individually, and both sides had broad discretion to refuse without detailed legal justification. The ratification of the new treaty in 2023 fundamentally changed this: most of the legal loopholes that previously allowed extradition to be delayed or blocked are now closed.The foundational document is the Extradition Treaty between the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the United Arab Emirates, signed in 2021 and entering into force in June 2023. France concluded a similar bilateral extradition treaty with the UAE earlier — see extradition between UAE and France, signed in 2007. The treaty establishes the parties’ obligations to extradite persons accused or convicted of criminal offences, defines the grounds for refusal, and regulates procedural timelines. Together with UAE Federal Law No. 39 of 2006 on International Judicial Cooperation, it forms a complete legal framework for interaction between the two states. These two documents set the rules of the game — and it is within them that the norms underpinning the defence are found.

Passive extradition is the scenario in which the Netherlands submits a request to the UAE for the surrender of a specific individual. The process is initiated through diplomatic channels: the Dutch side transmits a formal request through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs or directly via the Ministry of Justice. In parallel, the Interpol mechanism may be activated — in particular, entry into the international wanted list via a Red Notice. It is from this moment that the situation becomes critical for the person being sought.

If a person appears in Interpol’s databases, they may be detained at Dubai or Abu Dhabi airport, or at any other border crossing point. UAE police respond to a Red Notice promptly: practice shows that detention occurs within a few hours of a database hit. After arrest, the requesting party has 60 days to submit a full package of documents supporting the extradition request — this deadline is the key benchmark for building a defence strategy.

It is important to understand: a Red Notice is not an international arrest warrant. It is a notification instrument that obliges national authorities to detain the person and initiate a check. UAE police act on the basis of their own national law, not directly on Interpol’s instructions. This distinction has practical significance: if grounds exist, a Red Notice can be challenged before Interpol’s Commission for the Control of Files (CCF), and if successful, the data may be deleted from the databases even before the extradition procedure concludes.

After detention, the case is referred to the UAE Court of Appeal — depending on the emirate, most often the Dubai Court of Appeal. Crucially, the court does not assess the guilt of the detained person and does not examine the evidence on the merits of the accusation. Its role is formal: to determine whether the extradition request meets the requirements of the bilateral treaty and national legislation. The court verifies the presence of required documents, compliance with procedural conditions, and the absence of grounds for refusal.

The final decision, however, is made not by the court but by the UAE Ministry of Justice together with the executive branch. Even a positive court ruling does not preclude a refusal at the governmental level — and vice versa. It is precisely this administrative stage that opens additional avenues for defence through diplomatic and political channels.

The reverse situation — where the UAE submits a request for surrender — is less common, but has been increasing in frequency in recent years. Typically, these cases involve financial crimes: fraud, money laundering, and tax evasion. The UAE actively uses bilateral instruments to return persons under investigation or charged under local law.

In the Netherlands, the procedure is governed by the dedicated Extradition Act — the Uitleveringswet. The request is received by the Public Prosecution Service (Openbaar Ministerie, OM) in The Hague, which initiates judicial review. The Supreme Court of the Netherlands (Hoge Raad) plays a decisive role here: it applies extremely strict standards when assessing conditions of detention in the requesting country. If the court determines that there is a risk of treatment incompatible with European human rights standards in UAE prisons, extradition will be refused.

The existence of an active extradition treaty does not mean that extradition is inevitable. Both legal systems contain clear grounds upon which a request is subject to rejection. These are not loopholes — they are norms explicitly enshrined in the text of the treaty and national laws. A sound defence is built precisely on documenting their applicability.

Political nature of prosecution. If a criminal case is driven by the accused’s political beliefs, public activities, or membership of a particular group, the court may refuse extradition. The evidentiary basis is key: it is necessary to demonstrate that a political motivation underlies the criminal charge, rather than genuine criminal intent.

Human rights violations. The treaty contains explicit provisions prohibiting extradition where there are well-founded fears of torture, inhuman treatment, or an unfair trial. This ground is particularly relevant when Dutch authorities review requests — the Hoge Raad systematically applies the norms of the European Convention on Human Rights.

Dual criminality principle. The act for which extradition is sought must be a criminal offence in both countries. If conduct classified as a crime in one jurisdiction does not constitute an offence in the other, the request cannot be granted. This principle is especially significant in cases where the legal systems of the countries fundamentally diverge.

Death penalty. The Netherlands, like all EU member states, does not extradite persons who face the death penalty in the requesting country without receiving formal guarantees that it will not be applied. In the case of the UAE, this ground may be relevant for certain categories of charges.

Interpol acts as an information intermediary between national police services but does not hold supranational enforcement powers. A Red Notice, Green Notice, or other Interpol notices are notification mechanisms, not international judicial acts. National authorities make their own detention decisions based on their own legislation.In practice, however, presence in Interpol databases significantly increases the risk of detention at any border crossing — including in transit. This is precisely why one of the key defence tools is a pre-emptive application to Interpol’s Commission for the Control of Files (CCF) seeking data deletion. The basis for such an application is, in particular, Article 3 of Interpol’s Constitution, which prohibits the organisation from intervening in matters of a political, military, religious, or racial character. If the request underlying the Red Notice violates this principle, there is a real possibility of having data removed from the organisation’s databases before the extradition process concludes.

The greatest adversary in extradition cases is time. A person detained in the UAE is, from the very first minutes, in a situation where every word, every action, and every inaction may carry legal consequences. This is why consultation with Interpol Red Notice lawyers in Dubai must precede any contact with the authorities — including the initial interrogation.

Effective defence in such cases requires the coordination of two specialists. An attorney in the Netherlands works with the source material: analysing the criminal case, assessing the legality and merits of the extradition request, liaising with the Openbaar Ministerie, and where necessary initiating a judicial challenge to the request at the national level. An attorney in the UAE represents the client’s interests directly in local courts: challenging the detention, monitoring compliance with procedural deadlines, and ensuring that the request meets the requirements of the treaty and Federal Law No. 39 of 2006. Disjointed action without such coordination substantially reduces the prospects of success.

It is equally important to assemble the evidentiary basis in advance. The following is a basic list of documents necessary to build a line of defence:

The key parameters of the two procedures are set out in the table below — this provides a clear overview of the constraints and opportunities the defence will encounter depending on the direction of the request.

The extradition between UAE and Netherlands framework created a functioning legal mechanism that both countries use in practice. Its signing in 2021 and entry into force in June 2023 made extradition real rather than declaratory. However, the treaty is not a verdict. It contains norms on dual criminality, political offences, human rights, and other grounds for refusing extradition. These norms work when their application is handled by professionals who know the judicial practice of both jurisdictions. You can learn more about available international extradition services in Dubai to understand the full scope of legal assistance available.

If you or your client are facing a threat of Netherlands extradition — do not delay consultation. An initial case analysis will allow you to assess the real risks and define a defence strategy before the process becomes irreversible. Contact us for a confidential assessment of your situation.