In the current series of posts, I’ll examine the CCF’s most recent annual report, and what that report means for Red Notice subjects who are applying to have their notices removed or corrected.

The CCF issues its annual reports for the previous years at INTERPOL’s annual assembly. The most current report available is the one issued for 2018 (the 2019 report should be published in a few months). The report, found here, addresses everything from trends in member country activity to challenges the CCF faces within INTERPOL’s respective bodies to the CCF’s decision history.

Today, let’s consider the CCF’s data on its decisions from 2018.  My comments are in italics after each fact reported by the CCF:

• •  In 2018, the CCF completed the processing of 1,422 cases, either because it reached a final
    conclusion, or because the requests never became admissible.
    • In 1,422 cases in 2018, the CCF examined a case because the applicant submitted the proper documentation, or it did not admit the case to be considered because the applicant failed to submit the proper documentation. These are both new cases and cases from before 2018.
  • The 1,422 finalized cases included 536 complaints, 741 access requests, 97 applications for
    revision, and 48 other requests.
    • The cases examined by the CCF included applicants who wanted to know if their data was in INTERPOL’s files; or who asked INTERPOL to re-consider a previous decision; or who were requesting removal of their Red Notices or other notices or diffusions; or who had other concerns.
  • Among the 536 complaints processed in 2018, 346 concerned admissible requests from
    applicants who were the subjects of data recorded in INTERPOL’s files.
    • The CCF reviewed the cases of 346 people who were seeking removal of their information from INTERPOL’s files. Those people may have had Red Notices or other notices or diffusions.
  • Among the admissible requests, 70 concerned cases for which the CCF established that the
    data challenged met the required legal conditions for their retention in INTERPOL’s files, and
    were therefore considered compliant.
    • The CCF denied the requests in 70 cases where applicants were seeking removal of their data from INTERPOL’s files.
  • In 167 of the 346 admissible complaints, the Commission established that the challenged data did not meet legal requirements and should therefore be deleted from INTERPOL’s files as they did not comply with INTERPOL’s rules.
    • The CCF granted the requests in 167 cases where applicants were seeking removal of their data from INTERPOL’s files.
  • For 40 of these admissible complaints, the NCB(s) at the source of the data challenged did not provide appropriate answers to the questions raised by the CCF, and therefore the data were deleted from INTERPOL’s files; in 69 other cases, either the General Secretariat or the NCB at the source of the challenged data decided to delete the data from INTERPOL’s files before the Commission had taken a decision.
    • The NCBs of the countries that requested Red Notices, other notices or diffusions failed to respond or to respond completely to the CCF’s request for information that would have allowed it to keep the data in place in 40 of the admissible cases, so the CCF removed the data.
    • In 69 cases, the CCF did not have to consider the matter fully because the NCB deleted it on its own, or the General Secretariat decided prior to the CCF’s consideration of the case that the case should not be contained in INTERPOL’s files.

In the next several posts, we’ll break down each of the above points and analyze what they mean for current applicants.

As always, comments and questions are welcomed.