American Bar Association Presentation of the International Law and Criminal Justice Sections
By Kaila Hall
On July 22, 2024, the American Bar Association hosted a webinar1 on the latest developments in INTERPOL’s efforts aimed at curbing transnational repression and abuse of its systems. Speakers included Yaron Gottlieb, Executive Directorate at Office of Legal Affairs of INTERPOL, Wayne Salzgaber, former Director of INTERPOL Washington, and Ted R. Bromund, Senior Research Fellow at the Heritage Foundation. Michelle Estlund, founder and principal attorney of Estlund Law, and Yuriy L. Nemets, Managing Member at Nemets PLLC, also contributed to the discussion. Bruce Zagaris, partner at Berliner Corcoran & Rowe LLP, moderated the panel.
In 1923, the International Criminal Police Organization (INTERPOL) was established2 to facilitate police cooperation in investigations worldwide. Currently, INTERPOL has 196 member countries and has developed its legal framework and procedures. INTERPOL enables police agencies across the world to share and access data on crimes and criminals through the I-24/7 communications platform. The inter-governmental organization is unaffiliated with the United Nations.
Yaron Gottlieb started by discussing INTERPOL’s notices and diffusion mechanisms that protect individual rights. He also reviewed the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files3 (CCF) reforms and provided updates regarding the Notice Diffusion Task Force (NDTF). Originally created in 2016 to streamline the notice review process, the NDTF has recently undergone a restructuring to form a “cluster-based system of review,” meaning requests are reviewed by a region-specific team. Gottlieb described the CCF’s missions of guiding personal data processing operations and conducting CCF compliance checks. If the Review Chamber finds a non-compliant request, INTERPOL and national databases must delete the notice.
Wayne Salzgaber followed with a discussion on how the United States National Central Bureau (USNCB) utilizes INTERPOL’s notice and diffusion resources. USNCB is the official U.S. point of contact with INTERPOL for police cooperation.4 Originating in the Department of the Treasury, USNCB is now co-managed by the Department of Homeland Security and significantly contributes data. Salzgaber stated that the “US does not recognize a notice diffusion as a necessary instrument alone for arrest or detention.” Instead, USNCB compiles notices and additional sources to make an informed decision in terms of enforcement.
Afterward, Ted Bromund provided political analysis on the election of INTERPOL’s Secretary General. Candidates included Valdecy Urquiza, Stephen Kavanagh, Mubita Nawa, and Faisal Shahkar. In June, INTERPOL’s Executive Committee endorsed Urquiza’s candidacy. Bromund expressed concerns about Urquiza, who has recently stated he plans to retain the membership of states that abuse INTERPOL’s rules. Accordingly, Bromund called for INTERPOL’s democratic members to focus on INTERPOL’s governance, particularly the Executive Committee because it is the only body that can uphold INTERPOL’s neutrality and mitigate subversion. The current Secretary General, Jürgen Stock, will leave office and the new Secretary General will be inaugurated in November 2024.
Next, Michelle Estlund examined recent CCF and National Central Bureau (NCB) responses to red notice subjects and child custody cases. She explained how Article 40 of the CCF statute provided a deadline for it to respond to requests, minimizing delays that greatly affected red notice subjects in the past. Estlund covered the 2018-09 and 2716 child custody cases. In Decision 2018-09, the CCF held that a yellow notice was not necessary to find the child, but it may be depending on the location. As such, INTERPOL deleted the yellow notice. In case 2716, INTERPOL decided to delete both the yellow and red notices. Lastly, she stressed the importance of NCB input in red notice cases when the individual is seeking access, correction, or deletion of data in INTERPOL’s system.
Yuriy Nemets outlined the CCF’s most recent policy decisions, starting with the refusal of extradition now linked to the government’s obligation to present a “succinct and clear description of the criminal activities of the wanted person.” The CCF has also reinstated the Operating Rules of the CCF article 14(5), II.E/RCCF/CCF/2008, which states that the release of information “provisions shall not apply if the Commission considers that the person who is the subject of the request has provided sufficient evidence showing that he/she knows that there is information about him/her in INTERPOL’s files.” The CCF also released three decisions on ne bis in idem, clarifying that the rule applies when it is “explicitly accepted by States under [a] bilateral or multilateral agreement.” It is not triggered when “parallel proceedings in two or more countries are based on the same facts and charges.”
Kaila Hall is an intern at IELR. She is a rising senior at Cornell University.
[1] American Bar Association, Latest Developments in INTERPOL’s Fight Against Transnational Repression, American Bar Association Events. https://www.americanbar.org/events-cle/mtg/web/443708465/
[2] INTERPOL, What is Interpol?, https://www.interpol.int/Who-we-are/What-is-INTERPOL.
[3] INTERPOL, Commission for the Control of Interpol’s files (CCF), INTERPOL. https://www.interpol.int/en/Who-we-are/Commission-for-the-Control-of-INTERPOL-s-Files-CCF#:~:text=The%20CCF%20is%20an%20independent,the%20rules%20of%20the%20Organization.&text=Any%20person%20has%20the%20right,them%20held%20in%20INTERPOL’s%20files.
[4] Department of Justice (2023) Interpol – United States National Central Bureau, Department of Justice | INTERPOL – United States National Central Bureau | United States Department of Justice. https://www.justice.gov/doj/interpol-united-states-national-central-bureau