When Iranian political activist Rasoul Mazrae sought shelter from his own government, he fled, headed for Norway via Syria.<\/p>\n
He was followed by a petition from Iranian officials that Interpol, the international police agency, list him as a fugitive. Despite the United Nations recognizing him as a political refugee, the same Syrian government that today is cracking down on its own dissidents used that Interpol alert to deport Mazrae to Iran in 2006.<\/p>\n
Mazrae was jailed for two years. His family told a UN rapporteur he was tortured to the point of paralysis, had blood in his urine and lost all of his teeth.<\/p>\n
Mazrae was sentenced to death, and human rights observers lost track of him. \u201cWe are not aware that his death penalty has been carried out, but we cannot be absolutely sure,\u201d said James Lynch of Amnesty International.<\/p>\n
What Syria and Iran used to go after Mazrae was an Interpol “Red Notice.” This system of notices, little known outside legal circles, is being exploited for political purposes by some of the 188 member nations that belong to the 88-year-old international police cooperation agency.<\/p>\n
Interpol\u2019s primary purpose is to help police hunt down murderers and war criminals, child sex offenders and wildlife poachers. \u00a0But a five-month investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists<\/a> [4] shows a little-known side to Interpol’s work: \u00a0In cases from countries such as Iran, Russia, Venezuela and Tunisia, Interpol Red Notices are not only being used for legitimate law enforcement purposes, but to round up political opponents of notorious regimes.<\/p>\n For countries that want to abuse Interpol, “it’s a way to extend their arm to harass opponents \u2013 political or economic,” said Kyle Parker<\/a> [5], policy director of the U.S. Helsinki Commission, a human rights body of the U.S. Congress.<\/p>\n ICIJ analyzed a snapshot of Interpol’s Red Notices, published on December 10, 2010. It includes 7,622 Red Notices issued at the request of 145 countries. About a quarter of those were from countries with severe restrictions on political rights and civil liberties. About half were from nations deemed corrupt by international transparency observers.<\/p>\n The Islamic regime of Iran\u2019s use of Interpol stands out not just because of the Mazrae episode, but also because of people like Shahram Homayoun.<\/p>\n He fled Iran in 1992 after the mullahs took over. After he settled in Los Angeles, Homayoun started a satellite TV station to beam a message of civil resistance into the homes of Iranians.<\/p>\n His audience has scribbled his slogan in Farsi, Ma Hastim \u2013<\/em> \u201cWe Exist\u201d \u2013 on walls and bridges around the country. In 2009, he called on Iranians to gather at the tomb of the ancient Persian ruler Cyrus the Great. That\u2019s all. Just show up at his tomb, like a flash mob. That fall, he prompted Iranians to show up at their local bakery every Thursday and ask for bread.<\/p>\n He\u2019s definitely a troublemaker.<\/p>\n \u201cApparently, the Interpol thinks so too,\u201d Homayoun said, laughing at a reporter\u2019s quip.<\/p>\n In December 2009, Iran charged him with inciting \u201cterrorism against the Islamic regime such as writing slogans [on walls] and resisting the security forces,\u201d and, at Iran\u2019s request, Interpol issued a Red Notice and put Homayoun on its global most-wanted list.<\/p>\n Now officially an Interpol fugitive because of the Red Notice, Homayoun can\u2019t leave the United States. He\u2019ll probably never again see his parents in Iran. Fortunately for Homayoun, the U.S. won\u2019t arrest him, let alone send him to Iran.<\/p>\n How the System Works<\/strong><\/p>\n Interpol Red Notices originate from police in member countries who send them as domestic arrest notices. Interpol then generally\u00a0sends them out as global Red Notices. The notices allow police in other countries to arrest suspects for extradition.<\/p>\n The agency operates a closed communications system linking police via vast international databases. Interpol works to raise police standards with training in forensics and investigations. It plays an essential and celebrated role in fostering international cooperation. Its current chief is Ron Noble, a former U.S. federal prosecutor and oft-mentioned candidate to one-day lead the FBI. Noble has served as chief of the Secret Service, U.S. Customs and the bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.<\/p>\n Interpol\u2019s member nations span from democracies to dictatorships. Iran, North Korea and Libya are members. Their requests to Interpol are treated the same as those from democracies like Canada, Britain or France.<\/p>\n In theory, Interpol cannot get involved in \u201cany intervention or activities of a political, military, religious or racial character,\u201d according to its constitution<\/a> [6].<\/p>\n Interpol\u2019s chief lawyer, Jo\u00ebl Sollier, said the agency works hard to ferret out cases chiefly motivated by politics, rather than crime. \u201cIf we don\u2019t,\u201d he said, \u201cwe are dead.\u201d<\/p>\n International cooperation is based on trust. If Interpol is seen as political, Sollier said, it loses credibility.<\/p>\n But there\u2019s no way to publicly determine how often Interpol catches politically motivated cases. Here\u2019s why:<\/p>\n Interpol, the world\u2019s largest international police organization:<\/p>\n Critics of Interpol \u2014 lawyers who\u2019ve dealt with it and human rights observers \u2014 say Interpol\u2019s workings make it vulnerable to abuse by countries that target people for political reasons.<\/p>\n And, they say, countries use Interpol\u2019s Red Notices against their enemies because it\u2019s a terrific weapon. International banks will close accounts. If subjects cross some borders, they can wind up locked up for months with no recourse, or sent back to the country pursuing them.<\/p>\n \u201cIt\u2019s not like fighting a criminal charge,\u201d said the U.S. Helsinki Commission\u2019s Kyle Parker, who has studied how Russia uses Interpol.<\/p>\n \u201cA Red Notice can be even more effective than the judicial system \u2014 with none of the safeguards \u2026 It doesn\u2019t prosecute you; it persecutes you.\u201d<\/p>\n Interpol says it is constantly working to make its system better. But its chief lawyer Jo\u00ebl Sollier acknowledged Interpol has limits.<\/p>\n \u201cYou receive something from a country where human rights are not respected \u2026 where the independence of the judiciary is far from perfect. \u2026 You never know,\u201d he said. \u201cI would love to have only requests from Switzerland, you know? It\u2019s not the case. The world is not like that.\u201d<\/p>\n Nearly half of published Red Notices in the snapshot examined by ICIJ were from countries in Transparency International\u2019s index of countries listed as most corrupt on its global corruption index<\/a> [7]. It measures perceptions of corruption, including in law enforcement and the judicial system. Those countries include Honduras, Albania, Russia, Belarus, Argentina, Azerbaijan, Pakistan, Ukraine, Vietnam, Paraguay, Tajikistan, Venezuela, Libya, Bangladesh, Indonesia, Iraq and Iran.<\/p>\n More than 2,200 of the published Red Notices were from countries listed as providing no political rights or civil liberties<\/a> [8] by the independent non-governmental organization Freedom House. These include Russia and Belarus \u2014 the fourth and fifth most frequent sources of public Red Notices seen by ICIJ.<\/p>\n Among the top 30 countries requesting public Red Notices were Azerbaijan, the United Arab Emirates, China, Rwanda, Vietnam, Tajikistan, Saudi Arabia, Libya, Iraq and Iran.<\/p>\n So what measures does Interpol take to prevent political abuse? And how often does it catch problems?<\/p>\n There\u2019s no way to find out how often.<\/p>\n Interpol Isn\u2019t Saying<\/strong><\/p>\n Interpol won\u2019t share any figures on the number of Red Notice requests it rejects because of political reasons \u2014 as it did, for instance, when Ecuador asked Interpol to list Colombia\u2019s defense minister for his role in a raid on Colombian rebels inside Ecuador.<\/p>\n Interpol\u2019s press officer, Rachael Billington, insisted Interpol isn\u2019t keeping secrets. She said it\u2019s just not possible to determine how many political cases there are in Interpol\u2019s databases.<\/p>\n \u201cWhat may appear initially to be an Article 3 [a political case] may eventually be assessed as complying with Interpol\u2019s rules and regulations,\u201d Billington wrote. \u201cSimilarly, a Red Notice request may be refused for reasons entirely unrelated to Article 3, for example [the local police member] has failed to provide the necessary information required to issue a Red Notice, such as details of the arrest warrant, or not enough data has been included.\u201d<\/p>\n Yet Interpol has guidelines of practice for dealing with political cases that are chock-full of \u201creal-life examples\u201d of how Interpol has dealt with them.<\/p>\n For instance, in one of many cases cited by Interpol\u2019s practice guidelines, Interpol rejected a Red Notice request by police in one unnamed country that had charged a person from another country with espionage.<\/p>\n \u201cIt was concluded the charge and facts provided were of a purely political nature,\u201d Interpol wrote.<\/p>\n Interpol refused to give ICIJ any indication or estimate of how many cases Interpol deals with that are political in nature. The only figure its press office would provide is that roughly 3 percent of its cases are referred to Interpol\u2019s lawyers for review.<\/p>\n That means there\u2019s no way to tell how often, for instance, Interpol reverses itself on Red Notices it has published because of political concerns.<\/p>\n That is just what has happened with Venezuela.<\/p>\n In recent months, Interpol has blocked more than two dozen published Red Notices obtained by Hugo Chavez\u2019s government \u2014 against bankers and former political leaders who allege they\u2019re political targets of Chavez.<\/p>\n One of them is Manuel Rosales, who lost to Chavez in the 2006 presidential election and has been a leading opponent of Chavez. Interpol put him on its most-wanted fugitive list in 2009 \u2014 after Rosales sought, and later won, political asylum in Peru.<\/p>\n Since then Rosales has been quietly scrubbed from Interpol\u2019s public website.<\/p>\n Another is Nelson Mezerhane, former\u00a0owner of\u00a0Banco Federal and\u00a0former owner of the opposition news channel\u00a0Globovisi\u00f3n.<\/p>\n Interpol is now vetting every request from Venezuela more closely.<\/p>\n So how often do countries get away with abusing Interpol with political cases?<\/p>\n Billy Hawkes heads Interpol\u2019s appeals body \u2013 it handles complaints from people on Interpol\u2019s fugitives list who say they are targets of political prosecutions.<\/p>\n He said the number of abuses that come to light is low, relative to the thousands of Red Notices Interpol issues each year.<\/p>\n For instance, he said only 21 of the 215 complaints filed in 2009 with Interpol\u2019s appeals body \u2014 called the Commission for the Control of Interpol\u2019s Files \u2014 specifically claimed they were being targeted because of politics.<\/p>\n But not every possible abuse ends in a complaint. Homayoun, the Iranian satellite television owner, for instance, had not filed a complaint with Interpol\u2019s appeals body when ICIJ interviewed him.<\/p>\n Cases Against Dissidents<\/strong><\/p>\n In the public Red Notice database, published reports, court documents and interviews with lawyers and other experts in Interpol\u2019s process found at least 17 countries in the last five years have used the agency to go after dissidents or political opponents, economic targets or environmental activists.<\/p>\n Among the cases:<\/p>\n One of them is Ilya Katsnelson, a Russian-born U.S. citizen whose shipping company did business with a Russian company related to\u00a0 Yukos. In its grab for Yukos, Russia charged Katsnelson with tax evasion, fraud and money-laundering \u2014 involving the Russian company that he didn\u2019t own, manage or have any influence over.<\/p>\n Russia has used Interpol to pursue him for five years.<\/p>\n Because of that, Katsnelson spent 50 days in a maximum security German prison after he tripped the Interpol alert.<\/p>\n Both Denmark and Germany have reviewed Russia\u2019s case against him and refused to extradite him to Russia. After its review, Germany sent him home from prison with an armed escort. \u201cWe have to protect you from the Russians,\u201d he recalled the Germans telling him.<\/p>\n A British magistrate found Russia\u2019s case against his business partner to be \u201clikely politically motivated.\u201d<\/p>\n Interpol\u2019s Political Dance<\/strong><\/p>\n Interpol won\u2019t talk about specific cases or countries. But its officials say their job is complicated in cases where politics mingle with allegations of crime.<\/p>\n In the case of a coup, for instance, a new regime indicts the ousted leaders for corruption. Politically motivated, right?<\/p>\n Not always, said Interpol\u2019s chief lawyer Jo\u00ebl Sollier, an affable Frenchman who left the United Nations to head Interpol\u2019s legal affairs office in 2008.<\/p>\n He said in the coup scenario, the grounds for prosecution may well be true \u2014 even though the context is political.<\/p>\n \u201cSometimes it\u2019s really tricky, you see,\u201d Sollier said during an interview at Interpol\u2019s headquarters in Lyon.<\/p>\n Sollier, a former judge, helped draw up the guidelines Interpol lawyers use to consider whether a case violates Interpol\u2019s ban on political cases.<\/p>\n \u201cNeutrality is, and always has been, paramount to Interpol,\u201d reads Secretary General Ron Noble\u2019s foreword to the guidelines. \u201cIt is of the utmost importance that our activities transcend domestic and international politics. \u201c<\/p>\n The guidelines explain Interpol\u2019s decision-making process in cases involving former politicians, for instance, and its approach to cases that could be political \u2014 for example, criminal charges that arise from election activity.<\/p>\n In the end, the guidelines call for a case by case review of the facts underlying a particular case.<\/p>\n Billy Hawkes, the head of Interpol\u2019s appeals body, likes to quote the old adage that politics is in the eye of the beholder: \u201cOne man\u2019s terrorist is another man\u2019s freedom fighter.\u201d<\/p>\n But Interpol has another, structural hurdle to overcome in ferreting out political cases.<\/p>\n \u201cInterpol is not like the United Nations,\u201d says Philippe Neyroud, a lawyer in Geneva who has represented people on Interpol\u2019s Red Notice list. \u201cIt\u2019s just like the Jockey Club.\u201d<\/p>\n Because Interpol answers only to its police members and its own appeals body, Interpol\u2019s decisions and actions are geared toward maintaining police cooperation. Among other things, this means not ruffling too many feathers among its members.<\/p>\n Interpol\u2019s operations are based on the presumption that police are telling the truth and are acting with integrity. It\u2019s actually written in its rules.<\/p>\n In winter, on a gray day, lawyer Yaron Gottlieb sat inside Interpol\u2019s fortress-like headquarters in Lyon and explained Interpol\u2019s Red Notice process.<\/p>\n \u201cWe assume that what we receive here is accurate and relevant,\u201d said Gottlieb, a friendly, intense young lawyer who has been with Interpol since 2005. \u201cThat an arrest warrant is issued by a judge who is not corrupt. And of course, that the case is not political. But then, if we receive information or if we have our own information \u2014 that in fact, the case is different from what it seems to be \u2014 we engage in a full review.\u201d<\/p>\n Sometimes, Gottlieb said, lawyers or Interpol\u2019s appeals body will flag a potentially political case. Sometimes, a third country will ask Interpol whether a certain Red Notice is political, and that will trigger a review.<\/p>\n Interpol will also sometimes flag a case after hearing about it on the news. The nerve center of Interpol is a room with a wall of TV screens beaming in cable news channels and top stories from around the world.<\/p>\n \u201cWe\u2019ll say, hmmm, let\u2019s check if we have already published it,\u201d Gottlieb said. \u201cAnd maybe the [front office] has published it already. But then, we can always reopen a case for review.\u201d<\/p>\n In other words, Interpol has developed a fluid, informal system for catching political cases. It can turn to regional experts and information from defense lawyers, human rights groups and court decisions to help decide about particular cases.<\/p>\n As its chief lawyer, Sollier said his personal instruction is to simply cancel a Red Notice when there\u2019s a doubt.<\/p>\n But Interpol doesn\u2019t have independent investigative powers. And its purpose is not to get to the truth of a case. It\u2019s there to help its members \u2014 the police.<\/p>\n So Interpol\u2019s view of a political case doesn\u2019t always match others\u2019 views.<\/p>\n Take the case of Wikileaks\u2019 Julian Assange. When Sweden wanted to question Assange on allegations of rape, they got Interpol to issue a Red Notice \u2014 just to arrest him for questioning. Assange\u2019s lawyers charged the case was political, aimed at shutting him and Wikileaks down.<\/p>\n Sweden \u2014 and Interpol \u2014 saw it differently.<\/p>\n A former senior U.S. State Department official told ICIJ that the U.S. government routinely marked some Interpol Red Notice cases as \u201cpolitically motivated\u201d \u2014 when Interpol had not.<\/p>\n For instance, in 2005, the U.S. let in two partners of Mikhail Khordokovsky on Interpol\u2019s fugitives list \u2014 Mikhail Brudno and Vladimir Dubov. They joined President Bush at a National Prayer Breakfast.<\/p>\n The U.S. Interpol office, based in the Justice Department, refused an interview for this story.<\/p>\n Why does it matter whether Interpol gets it right? After all, Interpol doesn\u2019t have the power to arrest anyone. It just puts people on a most-wanted fugitives list.<\/p>\n Being on that list can change your life \u2014 or end it if you get extradited to a country that doesn\u2019t follow the rule of law.<\/p>\n You can be on Interpol\u2019s list even if you\u2019re a political refugee \u2014 and have won protection from the very country that is pursuing you through Interpol.<\/p>\n There\u2019s nowhere for a fugitive to turn when Interpol makes a mistake \u2014 and when it\u2019s not safe to return to the country behind that mistake.<\/p>\n Mistakes are something to think about \u2014 at a time when Interpol is growing rapidly \u2014 and is automating more of its work.<\/p>\n In 2005, Interpol issued 2,343 Red Notices. Last year, it was 6,344.<\/p>\n Partly to deal with that increased workload, Interpol is putting more power into the hands of its police members.<\/p>\n Two years ago, police had to apply directly to Interpol for a Red Notice. Today, every Red Notice request is entered into the system directly by the police themselves \u2014 not by Interpol. Police around the world instantly see those notices \u2014 before Interpol even reviews them.<\/p>\n Police can also bypass the formal Red Notice system altogether \u2014 and just type an informal notice of arrest in an email \u2014 and post it on Interpol\u2019s communications system. Those email notices \u2014 Interpol calls them \u201cdiffusions\u201d \u2014 go out instantly \u2014 with no automatic Interpol review.<\/p>\n Diffusions are pretty popular among Interpol members. Tunisia just used one to pursue deposed President Zine al-Abidine Ben Ali.<\/p>\n And these informal email notices are linked to far more arrests than arrests linked to the Red Notices Interpol vets for political concerns.<\/p>\n Interpol says it knows of 1,858 arrests last year of people named in these email notices. That\u2019s more than twice the number of arrests last year \u2014 663 \u2014 of people named in Red Notices, that Interpol says it\u2019s aware of.<\/p>\n A Recipe For Abuse<\/strong><\/p>\n To critics, Interpol\u2019s workings add up to a recipe for abuse \u2014 by countries run by dictators or human rights violators or countries without independent judiciaries.<\/p>\n \u201cI think the process is unfair,\u201d said Anand Doobay<\/a> [9], a British lawyer who has defended people on Interpol\u2019s list. \u201cThere\u2019s no transparency to it. It\u2019s weighted in favor of law enforcement and the need to prevent and disrupt serious crime and terrorism. There\u2019s very little by way of protection to keep the state \u2014 or even one corrupt prosecutor \u2014 from misusing the process.\u201d<\/p>\n It boils down to Interpol not being subject to any outside oversight, said Philippe Neyroud, the Geneva lawyer. \u201cSo when there\u2019s an abuse, there\u2019s almost no remedy.\u201d<\/p>\n \u201cInterpol is doing lots of good things, thank God!\u201d he said, adding that \u201cnobody does just good things\u201d without sometimes doing the wrong thing.<\/p>\n Roger Gherson<\/a> [10], a London-based immigration and human rights lawyer, said, \u201cIn this day and age, to have any policing authority without the ability to be monitored by any independent body is not a healthy thing to have.\u201d<\/p>\n Interpol points to its own appeals body as a remedy for those who believe they have been wronged. Interpol created the Commission for the Control of Interpol\u2019s Files in the 1980s to help it navigate the seas of international data protection \u2014 and handle complaints from people who say they are political targets \u2014 like the shipping magnate Ilya Katsnelson.<\/p>\n Billy Hawkes is head of Ireland\u2019s data protection authority; he chairs the part-time board of the commission. He is a warm and public-minded man who is clearly dedicated to using the commission to try to keep Interpol within the lines of international law and data protection law.<\/p>\n Last year, the commission recommended Interpol remove 21 cases from its databases altogether because of problems. It called for Interpol to remove another 73 notices from its public website \u2014 although police can still see them, and act on them.<\/p>\n But the commission has limits. It can\u2019t investigate cases on its own and its recommendations are not binding on Interpol.<\/p>\n Hawkes said there is \u201cclear understanding\u201d that Interpol will follow the commission\u2019s recommendations, even though there is no legal obligation to do so.<\/p>\n And while its board members are independent, Interpol funds and staffs the commission.<\/p>\n Interpol\u2019s rules dictate that any finding by the commission that a certain case is political, or a finding by Interpol\u2019s staff, can be overturned by a simple majority vote of its members \u2014 the police.<\/p>\n \u201cIt winds up being a diplomatic decision, a political decision that concerns the political freedom of a person,\u201d said Mario Savino, a legal expert who has written about Interpol.<\/p>\n That is what happened to the former prime minister of Kazakhstan, who found his country asking for a Red Notice on him after he opposed the president. Interpol rejected the request, after judging it political. At Interpol\u2019s next General Assembly, the police members voted to reinstate<\/a> [11] the Red Notice. And Interpol did just that.<\/p>\n Secretary General Ron Noble said after the vote: \u201cInterpol is a democratic organization, and when our members have expressed their will through the democratic process, the general secretariat moves promptly \u2014 as in this case \u2014 to implement the member states\u2019 decision.\u201d<\/p>\n In other words, Interpol follows the rules of the club.<\/p>\n\n
\n