Removal of an Interpol Red Notice in a Service Weapon Case Initiated by Ukraine in the UAE
The client was placed on Interpol’s international wanted list and detained in the UAE on a charge of misappropriating a service weapon in the first days of the armed conflict. We demonstrated the absence of criminal intent, the military and emergency context of the events, and the complete lack of international interest in the case. As a result, the Interpol Commission found the international search disproportionate and inconsistent with the rules of international police cooperation, and decided to delete the client’s data from all databases entirely.
Lawyer
Anatoliy Yarovyi
The Essence of the Problem
Information about the client was entered into Interpol’s database at the request of Ukrainian law enforcement authorities. The Red Notice was based on a charge of misappropriating a service weapon and ammunition in the first days of the armed conflict in February 2022.
The client, a police officer, received his service weapon in an emergency and soon left Ukraine, fearing for his family’s safety. He was later placed on the international wanted list, which led to his detention in the United Arab Emirates and significant restrictions on his freedom of movement.
To protect his rights, the client applied to the Commission for the Control of INTERPOL’s Files (CCF), requesting the deletion of the data as non-compliant with the rules of international police cooperation.
Position of the Prosecution
The Ukrainian side argued that:
- the client, as a police officer, received a service weapon and ammunition;
- he subsequently left his post and the country;
- the weapon was hidden in a utility room;
- his actions qualified as unlawful misappropriation of a weapon;
- an arrest warrant was issued against him and an international notice was circulated.
It was also argued that the offence was a serious one and warranted an international search.
Defense position and key arguments
The defense consistently pointed to the following circumstances:
1. No evidence of criminal intent
The client:
- did not use the weapon;
- did not attempt to sell or transfer it to third parties;
- voluntarily disclosed the location where the weapon was stored;
- did not derive any benefit.
The weapon was left on Ukrainian territory and subsequently seized by law enforcement agencies.
2. Military context of events
The events took place in the early days of full-scale hostilities:
- there was no stable communication or control;
- there was a threat to life and safety;
- there was a risk of hostilities in the region.
In fact, these were actions taken in an emergency situation, not a crime of greed.
3. Lack of interest in an international search
The defense pointed out that:
- Ukraine did not submit a proper extradition request;
- the UAE terminated the extradition proceedings;
- the case is not transnational in nature;
- there is no public danger that would justify an international search.
Interpol Commission Assessment
The Commission analyzed the materials presented and reached the following key conclusions:
- the incriminating actions do not indicate intent to steal;
- the weapons were not used for criminal purposes;
- there are no signs of systematic criminal activity;
- the facts do not indicate a high degree of public danger;
- the events took place in the context of armed conflict;
- an international search does not comply with the principle of proportionality.
It was specifically noted that:
- the cases in question do not meet the criterion of seriousness;
- there is insufficient interest for international police cooperation;
- the circumstances are predominantly of a professional and military nature.
Final decision
After reviewing the case, the Interpol Files Control Commission concluded that:
- the information about the applicant did not meet the requirements of Articles 35 and 83 of the Interpol Rules;
- the case did not pose a sufficient degree of public danger;
- the international search was disproportionate to the objectives pursued;
- the data should be deleted from the Interpol system.
The Commission decided to completely delete the information about the applicant from all Interpol databases.
This decision means:
- the termination of the international search;
- the removal of all restrictions associated with the Red Notice;
- the restoration of the right to freedom of movement.
Conclusion
This case demonstrates that even in the presence of formal criminal prosecution, Interpol cannot be used in situations:
- related to military operations;
- that do not pose a real public danger;
- that do not comply with the principle of proportionality;
- that are not of sufficient international significance.
If you are facing a similar situation
If:
- an Interpol notice has been issued against you;
- the case is related to military events or extraordinary circumstances;
- the charges are formal in nature;
- there is no real interest in an international search,
consulting experienced Interpol Red Notice lawyers is a key step.
A competent legal position allows you to achieve the removal of data, the termination of the search, and the protection of your rights at the international level.
