Extradition Between the UAE and Brazil

Between the UAE and Brazil, a bilateral UAE Brazil extradition treaty has been in force since 2017. This means that an arrest request can come from either country — and the other party has clear legal obligations to respond. If you or your loved ones are facing the threat of extradition — do not wait for the official request. Early consultation with a lawyer often changes the outcome of the case.

The legal framework of this mechanism rests on three levels: an international treaty, the national legislation of each country, and constitutional limitations.

The bilateral extradition between UAE and Brazil treaty was signed in Brasília on February 16, 2017. For a long time it remained on paper — until Brazil brought it into force through Decreto No. 10.728 of 2021. It was only from the moment of ratification that the treaty acquired binding legal force for both parties.On the UAE side, the primary instrument for international legal cooperation is Federal Law No. 39 of 2006 on international legal assistance in criminal matters. This law defines the procedure for receiving and executing foreign extradition requests. In Brazil, the Constitution plays a fundamental role: Article 5, LI explicitly prohibits the extradition of Brazilian nationals to foreign states — without any exceptions.

Extradition is not a single event but a multi-stage legal process. From the moment of first arrest to the actual transfer of a person to another state, several months typically pass — and often longer. Each stage involves judicial oversight and an opportunity for the defence.

The procedure begins either with an Interpol Red Notice or with a diplomatic request through official channels. On the basis of one of these documents, a person may be detained — at Dubai Airport, during a routine check, or following a wanted notice.

Following detention, the requesting state is obliged within the prescribed period to submit a complete set of documents for the formal extradition request. The period of provisional detention typically lasts up to 60 days. If proper documents are not received within this period — the person must be released.

Judicial review is the key stage at which the legal fate of the request is decided.

In Brazil, extradition cases are heard exclusively by the Supreme Federal Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal, STF). Crucially, the STF does not evaluate evidence of guilt and does not pass judgement on whether the person committed the offence. The Court verifies only the formal compliance of the request with the treaty’s conditions — the correctness of documents, the presence of dual criminality, and compliance with constitutional limitations. A similar constitutional protection for nationals exists in extradition between the UAE and Russia, where Russian law likewise prohibits surrendering its citizens.

In the UAE, the request passes through the Court of Appeal, which assesses its legal validity. The final decision on extradition is taken by the Ministry of Justice — this administrative stage adds a further level of scrutiny beyond judicial review.

This is the central section for those assessing their risks. The treaty provides for a number of mandatory and optional grounds for refusing extradition — and knowing each of them may prove decisive.

Interpol is not a law enforcement body and has no authority to arrest individuals independently. Its role is informational: the organisation transmits notices between national police bureaux, while enforcement remains with national authorities.

The key distinction is between a Red Notice and a Diffusion. A Red Notice is an official request through Interpol’s General Secretariat asking for a person’s location to be established and for their detention to be initiated for the purposes of subsequent extradition. A Diffusion is a less formal instrument: a member state sends a request directly to other bureaux, bypassing the centralised procedure. Diffusions appear less frequently in public databases, but legally function in a similar way.Interpol notices can be challenged. The Commission for the Control of Interpol’s Files (CCF) reviews complaints against Red Notices and Diffusions — including on grounds of violation of the organisation’s rules, political motivation of the request, or non-compliance with statutory requirements. A successful complaint leads to the removal of the notice from databases — which effectively blocks arrest when crossing borders.

An extradition case is not a situation in which one should rely on independent analysis of treaty texts. The gap between what the law says and how it is applied in practice in Abu Dhabi or Brasília can be considerable.

An experienced Interpol Red Notice lawyer is able to identify procedural violations that may appear insignificant at first glance but lead to the rejection of the request: errors in document translation, missing required apostilles or signatures, discrepancy between the description of the act and the requirements of dual criminality. A formal defect in the document package is a perfectly lawful ground for release at the provisional detention stage.

Coordination between the two jurisdictions is equally important. The defence strategy in the STF and the proceedings in UAE courts must be aligned: arguments advanced in one country may affect the position in the other. Independent attempts to navigate this web of norms frequently result in missed deadlines or contradictory procedural positions.

If you are assessing your risks or have already encountered an extradition request — the first step is to consult specialists with experience of both legal systems.

Below is a comparison of the key parameters of the extradition mechanism between the UAE and Brazil — for ease of navigation through the legal systems of both countries.

Does Brazil have extradition arrangements with the UAE? Yes — Brazil extradition to and from the UAE is a functioning mechanism, not an abstract legal construct. Since the treaty’s ratification in 2021, both countries have had clear procedures for exchanging requests, and to ignore this fact would be a mistake.

At the same time, the treaty contains substantial limitations which, when properly applied, become instruments of defence. The constitutional prohibition on extraditing Brazilian nationals, the dual criminality requirement, the expiry of limitation periods, human rights risks — each of these grounds is capable of blocking or significantly complicating the execution of a request. The issue is that these arguments only work when they are properly advanced at the right moment and in the right court — whether that is the STF in Brasília or the Court of Appeal in Abu Dhabi.

Delay here is costly: the 60-day provisional detention period expires quickly, and procedural errors made at early stages are extremely difficult to correct afterwards.If you wish to understand how these grounds apply to your specific situation — contact us for a confidential consultation.