HomeHow We Secured the Removal of Our Client’s Data
Our lawyers secured the deletion of a client’s data from INTERPOL’s files after the Commission for the Control of Files (CCF) ruled that a 2010 diffusion issued against him violated INTERPOL’s rules on personal data processing.
Case Overview
In 2010, the client became the subject of a diffusion issued by Ukraine for allegations of “misappropriation or embezzlement of property entrusted to them involving a significant amount.” This was based on an arrest warrant, the basis of which had not been clearly substantiated by the requesting authorities.
The Commission’s Conclusions
The Commission determined that INTERPOL’s channels had been misused in the issuance of the diffusion. It emphasized that the ability to issue a domestic detention order should not rely on the involvement of INTERPOL.
Additionally, the Commission highlighted an aggravating factor—the relatively small sums involved in the alleged crime—which raised questions about the relevance of the case for international police cooperation as outlined in Article 35(1) of the RPD.
The Applicant’s Position
The applicant argued that the case was not significant enough to warrant international police cooperation due to the minimal financial damages involved.
Conclusions
The Commission concluded that the data concerning the applicant did not comply with INTERPOL’s rules on personal data processing and ordered its deletion from INTERPOL’s files. In a related case defending a Ukrainian asylum seeker against fabricated charges, our team applied the same proportionality arguments to prevent extradition and challenge the INTERPOL diffusion notice. For a related example involving a Green Notice removal after criminal record expungement, see our case on removing an INTERPOL Green Notice after expungement.
