INTERPOL Red Notices and Extradition

Initial Urgency, Authority and Deadline Map

When an arrest, border procedure, extradition request, CCF correspondence or a foreign court decision exists, we first determine at which stage the file stands. The country where the person is located, the requesting state, the INTERPOL record, the national arrest decision, the extradition file, and application and objection deadlines are shown on a separate urgency map. Where parallel procedures exist in different countries for the same event, a division of responsibility and a communication structure are established.

Determining the Type and Source of the Record

Red notices, diffusions, national search records, border alerts and other police cooperation data are distinguished. We establish which authority the existing document comes from, the requesting country, the basis decision, the charge and the date of the record. Publicly available information and data that must be verified through an official channel are not treated as the same.

Review of the Public Red Notice List and Identity Matching

Records on INTERPOL’s public web page are reviewed against name, date of birth, nationality, photograph and other distinguishing data. The possibility of a wrong person due to similar names or identity details is also assessed. The absence of a public result is not presented as a definite absence of a record.

Identity, Data Accuracy and Wrong-Person Review

Discrepancies in name similarity, transliteration, date of birth, nationality, passport, photograph and biometric information are reviewed. Where there is a risk of a wrong person or a merged record, it is explained with official identity documents and distinguishing data. A verification package is prepared without sharing unnecessary personal data.

Legal basis: Red notice · INTERPOL data rules

Application for Access to Data Before the CCF

An access application in accordance with the current CCF procedure is prepared to learn whether data concerning the person is processed in the INTERPOL Information System. The identity document, power of attorney or representation document, signature, summary of events and scope of the application are checked for admissibility. The applicant is informed of the consultation the CCF will hold with the source country and of the limits of the information it may disclose.

Application for Correction Before the CCF

Where there is an error or outdated information in identity, date, charge, status of the decision, sentence, limitation, citizenship or other data, a correction request is prepared. It is clearly shown which data is incorrect, why, and which official document supports the correct information. A general denial or the submission of untranslated documents alone is not considered sufficient.

Application for Deletion Before the CCF

Where it is claimed that the data violates the INTERPOL Constitution, the Rules on the Processing of Data or other applicable regulations, the grounds of violation are linked to the concrete facts of the file. Human rights, impartiality, data accuracy, purpose limitation, timeliness, seriousness, proportionality and procedural requirements are each assessed. The request is not framed as a retrial of the foreign criminal case.

CCF Admissibility and Document Package Check

It is ensured that the application is complete as to authority, representation, signature, identity, language, legibility, the form of attachments and the type of request. Document names, dates and explanations are arranged in an annex list. The official portal, file type and submission rules in force on the date of application are also checked.

Provisional Measure and Urgent Data Processing Review at the CCF

Where continued processing of the data creates an urgent and concrete risk of harm, the need for a provisional measure is justified under Article 37 of the CCF Statute. The request is linked to the record and the application file. A CCF measure on data processing does not replace a release, arrest, deportation or surrender decision of a national authority. Filing an application does not automatically suspend anything.

Legal basis: CCF application procedure · CCF Statute · CCF portal guide

Application for Review of a CCF Decision

After a CCF decision, where new and relevant facts have emerged that could change the earlier outcome, a review request may be prepared under the current procedure and time conditions. We document when the new fact became known, why it could not have been presented earlier and its probable effect on the decision. This route is not used to repeat the same claims.

Review of Proportionality, Purpose Limitation and Data Quality

The connection, scope, timeliness and accuracy of the processed data to the purpose of international police cooperation are assessed. The effect on the person of old, incomplete, out-of-context or excessively broad data is made concrete. The request rests not only on consequential harm but also on a breach of the data processing rule.

Pressure and Retaliation Claims Linked to a CCF Application

Where threats, pressure or retaliation are alleged because of an application, the date and perpetrator of the incident, communication or official records, and the link to the CCF application are set out. Information to the Commission is prepared in accordance with the stage of the existing file and confidentiality requirements. Since the CCF is neither a criminal investigating authority nor a human rights court, the person’s security and national complaint routes are addressed separately.

Legal basis: CCF Statute · CCF statements

Human Rights Review Under Article 2 of the INTERPOL Constitution

The claim that the request is incompatible with the spirit of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights is examined through person-specific facts. Conditions of detention, the risk of ill-treatment, access to defense, independent courts, discrimination, health and other fundamental rights aspects are supported by current and reliable sources. Instead of an abstract assessment of the country, the risk linked to the file is shown.

Impartiality Review Under Article 3 of the INTERPOL Constitution

The claim that the file has a political, military, religious or racial character is evaluated in its full context. The person’s status, the nature of the accusation, the time of the events, the requesting authority, the course of the proceedings, the link between the accusation and any political activity, and the weight of ordinary criminal elements are examined together. It is ensured that the Article 3 assessment is made file by file.

Documenting a Claim of Political Investigation or Prosecution

Where it is claimed that the real purpose of an investigation or prosecution is political pressure, a chronology, public statements, official documents, similar actions, the targeted activity and records on the right to defense are compiled. Political identity alone is not accepted as sufficient; the nature of the judicial charge and its concrete link to evidence are considered together.

Claims of Military, Religious or Racial Character

The scope of the file is separated with respect to the other areas prohibited by the INTERPOL Constitution. A claim that the matter concerns military discipline or exclusively military obligations, religious activity or racial targeting is assessed together with the ordinary criminal dimension of the alleged act and the dominant nature of the request. Documents are classified according to impartiality criteria.

Refugee Status and the Effect of International Protection Decisions on Records

We determine the state that granted protection, the current status of the decision and the country in respect of which the fear of persecution exists. Under INTERPOL’s refugee policy, we examine the effect on a red notice or diffusion originating from the country of persecution of refugee status verified by a Member State. An asylum application and a recognized status are not treated as the same. Requests from other countries, refusal or revocation of status, and national extradition or migration files are assessed separately.

Legal basis: INTERPOL Constitution · Refugee policy

Common Crime, Seriousness and Red Notice Conditions

Whether the accusation is of a serious ordinary crime, the penalty threshold, whether the request aims at prosecution or enforcement of a sentence, and the basis judicial decision are examined. Private law debts, family disputes, administrative violations, or matters that do not reach the required level of seriousness but are presented under a criminal label are investigated.

Basis Arrest Warrant and Current Status of the Foreign Decision

We examine whether the decision on which the red notice or diffusion is based remains in force, which authority issued it, whether it was issued in absentia, the outcome of any objection or legal remedy, and whether the decision was notified to the person. Where a definitive opinion on foreign law is needed, verification is obtained from a competent attorney in the country concerned.

Acquittal, Discontinuance, Lapse, Limitation, Amnesty and Post-Enforcement Review

The effect on the record of subsequent decisions on acquittal, no grounds for prosecution, lapse of the case, annulment of a conviction, limitation, amnesty or completion of enforcement is assessed. It is not assumed that such decisions will automatically be reflected in the INTERPOL system. Finality, scope, the match between person and act, and the requesting authority’s update are each checked separately.

Earlier Decision on the Same Act and Review of Duplicate Proceedings

Whether there is a final decision, investigation, refusal of extradition or earlier CCF decision on the same event in another country or in Türkiye is researched. Ne bis in idem, res judicata and claims of duplicate data processing are established on the basis of applicable law and the matching of the event. Different acts or periods are not wrongly treated as one event.

In Absentia Conviction and Retrial Safeguards

In a judgment rendered in the person’s absence, the summons and notification, awareness of the proceedings, any waiver of defense, access to counsel and the finality of the decision are reviewed. Under applicable treaty and human rights standards, the adequacy of the possibility of an effective retrial and of the safeguards provided is assessed. It is not assumed that every in absentia decision automatically prevents extradition, or that a formal safeguard is sufficient in every case.

Legal basis: INTERPOL data rules · Law No. 6706 · Extradition safeguards

Determining the Legal Effect of a Red Notice by Country

The legal effect of a red notice is not the same in every country. Arrest, provisional detention, notification and extradition procedures in the country where the person is located or intends to travel can be verified through local counsel. No general “safe travel” guarantee is given.

Review of and Objection to Diffusions

We seek to establish the origin of the diffusion, the recipient countries, the basis decision and the scope of the data. Since a diffusion is also subject to INTERPOL rules, an application for access, correction or deletion may be brought before the CCF depending on the nature of the file. The status of a red notice removal and that of the diffusion are checked separately.

Separation of National Records from INTERPOL Data

Data in the INTERPOL system is not the same record as a national arrest warrant, restriction, border alert, criminal record or police database. A CCF decision does not automatically annul the decision of a national authority. The competent authority and application route for a national record are determined separately.

Coordination with the Requesting Country and the National Central Bureau

Where the source country needs to update a decision, withdraw a request or issue an official statement, coordination may be established through a competent attorney in the foreign country and official channels. No direct contact contrary to procedure is made with INTERPOL or CCF members. The authority, purpose and effect on the file of each communication are recorded.

Implementation of a Deletion Decision and National Follow-Up

Where a deletion or correction decision has been implemented by the CCF or INTERPOL, the change in the INTERPOL system and the status in national databases are checked separately. The arrest warrant of the requesting country, the national border record or third-country data is not treated as having ended automatically. The scope of the decision, notice and, where necessary, national application routes are followed file by file.

Documents and notices showing that the deletion or correction has been applied in the relevant files are obtained; separate applications are planned for updates to national records. The possibility of a new record arising for the same event is compared with the scope of the earlier decision.

Legal basis: Red notice · Review and deletion of records

Defense Against an Extradition Request from Türkiye to a Foreign State

The conformity of the extradition request sent by the foreign state to Türkiye with Law No. 6706, applicable treaties and human rights standards is examined. Identity, the offense and the penalty threshold, dual criminality, limitation, citizenship, grounds for refusal, special circumstances and the sufficiency of documents are assessed. The stages before the Central Authority and before the court are followed separately.

Review of the Form and Documents of the Extradition Request

The basis decision, the description of events, statutory provisions, criminal information, identity documents, limitation, translation, approvals and treaty requirements of the request are checked. Inconsistencies in the persons, dates, acts and decisions in the documents are shown in a separate list of deficiencies. A deficiency is not presented as necessarily resulting in refusal of the request in every case; the possibility of having it completed is assessed separately.

Dual Criminality, Penalty Threshold and Limitation Review

Whether the alleged act constitutes an offense both for the requesting state and under Turkish law is assessed through the substance of the act rather than through the legal label. The penalty thresholds and limitation required for extradition are checked against the applicable law and treaty. Where there are several offenses, each is shown in a separate table.

Cases in Which Extradition May Be Refused or Rejected

Headings such as citizenship, political or military offenses, thought crimes, discrimination or intent to persecute, the risk of torture and ill-treatment, the death penalty, a decision on the same act, limitation, amnesty, extraordinary courts, fair trial and the person’s particular situation are examined to the extent they apply to the file. Mandatory refusal and discretionary assessment are not presented as the same.

Under Article 11 of Law No. 6706, personal circumstances such as being under eighteen, long residence in Türkiye and marriage are substantiated in terms of disproportionate hardship to the person or family in view of the seriousness of the act. Family ties are not presented as an automatic bar to extradition.

Political Offense, Political Motive and Risk of Discrimination

The dominant character of the event, the purpose of the request, and the claim that the person has been targeted because of opinion, citizenship, ethnic origin, religion, affiliation or political activity are examined, without stopping at the legal name of the accusation. The ordinary criminal elements and the weight of the political link are shown separately. Concrete file data is used rather than an abstract political characterization.

Citizenship, Multiple Citizenship and the Prohibition of Extradition

The person’s Turkish citizenship, the date on which citizenship was acquired, the situation of multiple citizenship and the effect of constitutional protection on the file are examined. Citizenship information is verified through official records. Where extradition is not possible, the consequences that may arise for investigation, prosecution or enforcement in Türkiye are assessed separately.

Under Article 38 of the Constitution and Article 11(1)(a) of Law No. 6706, a Turkish citizen may not be extradited to a foreign country, without prejudice to the record of obligations arising from being a party to the International Criminal Court. This protection does not automatically invalidate arrest or extradition proceedings of another state in its own territory.

Legal basis: Law No. 6706 · Constitution Art. 38

Provisional Arrest and Other Protective Measures

The legal conditions of provisional arrest and other measures applied before extradition documents arrive or while the process continues are examined. The source of the request, the assessment of strong suspicion, the time limit, the treaty and the Central Authority’s action are documented. Concrete information on the person’s health, family, residence and risk of flight is submitted in the proper manner.

In Türkiye, provisional arrest under Article 14 of Law No. 6706 and the protective measures under Article 16, which apply once the extradition documents have been received, are separate stages. The same forty-day upper limit is not treated as applying to both stages.

Review of Detention, Judicial Control and Objections

The continuation of the measure restricting liberty is reviewed for its proportionality and for alternative measures. Hearing, objection and review dates are followed; access to an interpreter and to defense counsel is ensured. Extraditability and the necessity of the protective measure are not confused with each other.

Detention in extradition proceedings is reviewed by the heavy penal court at intervals of no more than thirty days. Within one year of the acceptability decision becoming final, the absence of an extradition decision under Article 19 of the Law and the time limit on total detention are followed separately.

Urgent Coordination at the Border, at the Airport or at the Time of Arrest

The place where the person is located, the authority conducting the procedure, the record and file numbers, the reason for detention, health and interpreter needs, access to a attorney and notification of relatives are gathered quickly. Separate tasks are assigned for the criminal and extradition process in Türkiye and for any intervention in the foreign country. Appropriate legal support is provided against the risk of signing unverified statements or documents.

Remedies Against Extradition Decisions and Applications at the Surrender Stage

The appeal against the decision given in the ordinary extradition proceedings under Article 18 of Law No. 6706 and the objection route based on consent under Article 17 are followed separately. The type of decision, its notification and the applicable time limit are determined from the file. Deferral of surrender, continuing protective measures and necessary applications for fundamental rights are directed to their competent authorities; an application is not assumed to suspend the other process automatically.

Legal basis: Law No. 6706 · Extradition procedure in Türkiye

Torture, Ill-Treatment, the Death Penalty and the Risk of Manifest Injustice

In case of extradition, the person’s life, physical integrity, prison conditions, state of health, the death penalty or inhuman punishment, evidence obtained through torture and the risk of manifest injustice are assessed on a person-specific basis. The content, reliability and traceability of diplomatic assurances are examined in accordance with the nature of the file. Where necessary, interim measure routes before the Constitutional Court and the European Court of Human Rights are assessed as a separate legal field of work.

The scope and conditions of an interim measure before the Constitutional Court and of a provisional measure under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court of the European Court of Human Rights are examined separately. An application does not by itself stop surrender; domestic remedies, the risk of imminent and irreparable harm, the scope of the decision and notice to the competent authority are followed together.

Principle of Specialty and Post-Extradition Protection

The rule that a person extradited is, in principle, prosecuted or has the sentence enforced only for the act on which the extradition decision is based is observed in the file. Subsequent extension of the request, re-extradition, consent and exceptions are examined under the applicable treaty and law. Monitoring of the process after surrender may be carried out in coordination with a foreign attorney.

Multiple Extradition Requests, Transit and Coordination of Surrender

Where several states have requested the same person, the factors affecting the priority of the requests are assessed. Transit, temporary surrender, deferral of surrender and the handover of property are planned separately. The power of each state and the communication with the Central Authority are conducted under a clear allocation of tasks.

Consent-Based Extradition and the Effects of Waiver of Specialty

The person’s consent to extradition may lead to the process being conducted differently from the ordinary procedure. The scope of consent, access to an interpreter and defense counsel, the objection route and the approval of the Central Authority are explained. Consent to extradition and waiver of specialty protection are separate declarations of will; their consequences and any exceptions under the relevant treaty are examined in the concrete file. A declaration is not made merely because it may speed up the process, without an assessment of its legal consequences.

Legal basis: Law No. 6706 · Extradition safeguards · ECtHR interim measure · Constitutional Court interim measure

Monitoring Türkiye’s Extradition Request to a Foreign State

In the process of requesting extradition from a foreign state to Türkiye for an investigation, prosecution or enforcement of a final sentence, the judicial decisions, description of the acts, applicable offenses and penalties, limitation, identity, translation and supporting documents are examined. The requirements of foreign law are coordinated with a competent attorney in that country.

The extradition request is not prepared on behalf of a state by a private person or by a attorney directly; the scope of service covers the legal contribution to the preparation of the request file, the application to the competent judicial authorities and the monitoring of procedures conducted through the Central Authority.

Effect Analysis on Travel, Residence, Citizenship and Financial Transactions

The possible effect of INTERPOL or national records on border crossings, visas, residence, citizenship, banking and compliance reviews is assessed for the relevant country and institutions. The CCF does not decide in place of national immigration or bank authorities. No guaranteed outcome or single answer valid for all countries is offered; the necessary local confirmations are planned.

Review the scope of the Entry Bans to Türkiye, Restriction Codes and Visa Disputes service.

Extradition and deportation are different procedures. Under Article 12 of Law No. 6706, the opinion of the Central Authority is also sought in the extradition process and in deportation to the state that has refused the extradition request; the safeguards of migration law and non-refoulement are considered as well.

Legal basis: Law No. 6706 · Türkiye’s extradition requests

International Mutual Legal Assistance and Letters Rogatory in Criminal Matters

The processes for requests from a foreign judicial authority for testimony, documents, bank records, search, seizure, expert opinion, service or another act, and for the execution in Türkiye of a foreign request, are examined. The type of request, the treaty, the Central Authority, the competent judicial authority, translation and any special procedure are determined. Unlawful evidence gathering or the use of unauthorized special investigation methods is not used.

Coordination of Cross-Border Evidence, Assets and Protective Measures

The international channels for requests for bank records, digital data, objects, assets, seizure, forfeiture and interim measures linked to a criminal investigation are determined. Criminal mutual legal assistance, civil and commercial legal assistance, and documents that may be obtained by a private party are distinguished. Personal data, banking secrecy and the right to defense are observed.

Legal basis: Law No. 6706 · Judicial cooperation and transfer

Transfer of Investigation or Prosecution

The conditions for transfer of an investigation or prosecution conducted in Türkiye to a foreign state, or for taking over a foreign file by Türkiye, are examined. The person’s citizenship and place of residence, the location of the evidence, the offense and penalty threshold, limitation, earlier proceedings and the opinion of the Central Authority are assessed. The effect of the transfer request on the existing file is followed separately.

Transfer of Enforcement

For enforcement of a foreign court decision in Türkiye, or of a Turkish court decision in a foreign state, the finality, dual criminality, remaining sentence, the place where the person is located and other conditions are assessed. Adaptation, the enforcement period and the effects of the foreign state’s decision are examined on the concrete file. Recognition and enforcement of a judgment is not confused with the transfer of enforcement of a sentence.

The transfer of enforcement and the actual transfer of the convicted person to another state are subject to different conditions. Applications concerning the adaptation decision and the enforcement account are separated from applications concerning the merits of the conviction.

Transfer of Convicted Persons to Türkiye or to a Foreign State

The conditions for transfer are examined so that the convicted person may serve the remainder of the sentence in the state of which they are a citizen or with which they have strong social ties. Finality, consent, dual criminality, the remaining sentence, health, costs, litigation expenses and social rehabilitation aspects are documented. Transfer is not presented as the extinction of the conviction or as a guarantee of early release.

Review the scope of the Sentence Enforcement Law, Probation and Prison Procedures service.

Legal basis: Law No. 6706 · Judicial cooperation and transfer