When we hear the word “Interpol,” our imagination often conjures scenes from spy thrillers: agents in black sunglasses crossing borders without passports and arresting villains anywhere in the world. But the reality is more prosaic and legally complex. Interpol is not a “super-police” force, but a giant database for exchanging information.
However, even such a powerful structure cannot operate in a vacuum. Above it stands an invisible yet firm framework — the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). How does this document, adopted by the UN in 1948, today protect people from unlawful persecution through Interpol channels? Let’s break it down.
Foundation: Interpol’s Constitution and Human Rights
To understand how this works, we need to look at the organization’s main document — the Interpol Constitution. Many will be surprised, but Interpol is obliged to respect human rights not just “by choice” but by its own statute.
Key point: Article 2 of the Interpol Constitution states that the organization’s activities must be carried out “in the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.”
This means that any request for a wanted notice, any “Red Notice” passing through Lyon (the headquarters), must pass a test for compliance with the UDHR. If a request violates human rights, it is illegal.
The Main Safeguard: Article 3
The most powerful tool for protection against abuses is the famous Article 3 of the Interpol Constitution. It strictly prohibits the organization from interfering in matters of:
- Political;
- Military;
- Religious;
- Or racial nature.
This is a direct reflection of the principles of the Declaration: no one should be persecuted for their beliefs.
Pain Points: Where the Declaration Collides with Reality
Despite the noble words in the constitution, the system is not perfect. Authoritarian regimes often try to use Interpol to hunt down dissidents, journalists, and businesspeople, disguising political cases as criminal ones. Here’s how specific articles of the UDHR impact these processes.
Right to Asylum (Article 14 UDHR) vs. Pursuit of Refugees
What the Declaration says: “Everyone has the right to seek asylum from persecution in other countries…”
The problem: Country A issues a warrant for an opposition figure. The person flees to Country B and is granted refugee status. If Interpol keeps them in the wanted database, it violates their right to asylum.
The solution: In 2015, Interpol adopted an official Refugee Policy. If a state confirms an individual’s refugee status, Interpol is obligated to remove the “Red Notice” from the country the person fled. This is a direct implementation of Article 14 of the UDHR. Refugee status de facto nullifies the request for a wanted notice from the persecuting state.
Freedom of Movement (Article 13 UDHR) vs. “Red Notice”
What the Declaration says: “Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and to choose their residence…”
The problem: A “Red Notice” is not an international arrest warrant, but it acts as a “digital trap.” A person can be detained at any airport, deprived of their freedom of movement, even if the charges are fabricated.
The solution: If lawyers prove that the restriction of movement is disproportionate or based on a politically motivated request, the Interpol Commission for the Control of Files (CCF) removes the data.
Prohibition of Torture and the Right to a Fair Trial (Articles 5, 10, and 11 UDHR)
What the Declaration says: “No one shall be subjected to torture…” and “Everyone… has the right… to have their case heard publicly and with due process…”
The problem: Can Interpol assist in extraditing a person to a country where courts are fully controlled by the government, and torture is used in prisons?
The solution: Legally, no. If the defense can prove that extradition would expose the person to torture (violating Article 5 UDHR) or they won’t receive a fair trial (violating Article 10 UDHR), Interpol must refuse cooperation. This is a complex process that requires references to reports from international organizations (such as Amnesty International or Human Rights Watch).
Protection Mechanism: Where Can an Ordinary Person File a Complaint?
Many people do not know that within Interpol, there is an independent body that functions like a court. This is the Commission for the Control of Files (CCF).
Its work is based on the same principles of the UDHR.
Right to access: You have the right to know whether data about you exists in the Interpol database (analogous to the right to information).
Right to correction: If the data is incorrect or violates Article 3 (political) or Article 2 (human rights), you can demand its removal.
Important to know: A request to CCF is an official legal procedure. The applicant writes a request (Request), referencing specific violations of the UDHR and the Interpol Constitution. If the Commission recognizes a violation, the data is removed from all global databases, and the national bureaus are notified.
Summary: A Fragile Balance
The impact of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights on Interpol is not just a formality. It is the only barrier that prevents the tool of international cooperation from turning into a weapon of global repression.
So, what do we have in the end?
Interpol is not neutral when it comes to human rights. It is obliged to protect them.
Refugee status is a shield. It blocks attempts at persecution through Interpol channels.
Politics are banned. Any hint of a political motive (Article 3) makes the search illegal under the organization’s rules.
For ordinary citizens, this means that even against a powerful state machine trying to misuse international resources, there is legal protection. And the name of this protection is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
