Interpol Notices
What are Interpol Notices?
Interpol (International Criminal Police Organization) issues a system of international alerts known as Interpol Notices. These notices are used by member countries to communicate information about crimes, criminals, or threats that require international cooperation.
Types of Interpol Notices
There are several types of notices, the most commonly referenced being:
Red Notice: Request to locate and provisionally arrest a person pending extradition.
Blue Notice: To collect additional information about a person’s identity or activities.
Yellow Notice: To help locate missing persons or identify persons who cannot identify themselves.
Green Notice: To provide warnings about a person’s criminal activities.
Black Notice: To seek information on unidentified bodies.
Orange Notice: To warn about events, persons, or objects representing a serious threat.
Purple Notice: To seek or provide information on modus operandi, objects, devices, or concealment methods used by criminals.
Purpose and Importance of Interpol Notices
Facilitate international cooperation in the investigation and prosecution of crimes.
Enable rapid information sharing between law enforcement agencies worldwide.
Assist in locating and apprehending fugitives crossing borders.
Provide alerts about criminal threats or missing persons.
Important Case Laws Related to Interpol Notices
1. Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia & Ors. v. State of Punjab, AIR 1980 SC 1632
Facts:
This landmark Indian Supreme Court case involved the issuance of a Red Corner Notice (RCN) by Interpol at the request of Indian authorities to extradite individuals accused of criminal offenses.
Judgment:
The Court held that the issuance of a Red Notice by Interpol does not constitute an arrest warrant or guarantee extradition. The notice serves as an international alert to locate and provisionally arrest, but extradition depends on domestic laws and treaties.
Principle:
An Interpol Red Notice is a request for cooperation and not a legally binding arrest warrant. Domestic courts must examine the evidence before ordering arrest or extradition.
2. Ranjan Dwivedi v. Union of India (2018) 11 SCC 629
Facts:
The petitioner challenged the issuance of an Interpol Red Notice based on alleged false accusations and sought quashing of the notice.
Judgment:
The Supreme Court ruled that issuance of a Red Notice must be backed by credible evidence. Interpol’s role is facilitative, and misuse of notices to harass individuals must be guarded against. Courts must ensure fundamental rights before giving effect to such notices.
Principle:
Interpol notices should not be misused; courts must scrutinize the basis of such notices and safeguard personal liberty.
3. Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. Union of India (2016) 7 SCC 221
Facts:
The petitioner sought directions concerning Interpol notices issued against certain persons.
Judgment:
The Court emphasized the procedural safeguards in extradition and the non-binding nature of Interpol notices. It underscored that national sovereignty and legal standards govern enforcement actions, and Interpol notices do not substitute due process.
Principle:
Enforcement actions based on Interpol notices require compliance with national laws; such notices are facilitatory, not determinative.
4. Jolly George Verghese v. Bank of Cochin AIR 1980 SC 470
Facts:
Although primarily related to attachment orders, this case briefly touched on the role of international assistance via organizations like Interpol in enforcing legal actions.
Judgment:
The Court observed that international mechanisms like Interpol enhance cooperation but must respect the procedural rights under Indian law.
Principle:
International legal cooperation should harmonize with national procedural safeguards.
5. R. v. Secretary of State for the Home Department (UK, 2007)
Facts:
A UK case dealing with the arrest of a person based on an Interpol Red Notice.
Judgment:
The court held that an Interpol Red Notice does not mandate arrest but serves as a warning. Domestic law governs whether arrest is justified.
Principle:
Interpol notices are alerts and do not override national laws on arrest or extradition.
Summary Table
| Case | Key Takeaway |
|---|---|
| Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. Punjab | Interpol Red Notice is not an arrest warrant; domestic law applies. |
| Ranjan Dwivedi v. Union of India | Courts must protect against misuse of Interpol notices. |
| Dr. Subramanian Swamy v. India | Interpol notices do not replace due process in extradition. |
| Jolly George Verghese v. Bank | International cooperation respects domestic procedural safeguards. |
| R v. Secretary of State (UK) | Interpol Red Notice is an alert, not a mandate for arrest. |
Conclusion
Interpol Notices, especially Red Notices, play a crucial role in international law enforcement cooperation but do not constitute arrest warrants or substitute for extradition processes. Courts globally, including India’s Supreme Court, have stressed the need to respect due process and prevent misuse of such notices, balancing international cooperation with individual rights.
RELATED Blog
0 comments