India’s First Interpol Purple Notice: Routine Financial Crime or International Concern?

India’s Enforcement Directorate (ED) has secured the country’s first Interpol Purple Notice, published in August 2025, targeting alleged trade-based money laundering methods involving Crown Minerals Trading Corporation. While the ED frames this as a milestone in international cooperation, the case raises questions about when domestic financial crimes warrant global police attention.

A Purple Notice seeks or provides information on modus operandi, objects, devices and concealment methods used by criminals. As such, they are not directed at individuals but at patterns of conduct. Examples of activities and tactics addressed by Interpol Purple Notices include cyberattacks targeting supply chains, unusual routes or specially modified vehicles for the illegal movement of goods and people, or fraud schemes such as phishing and complex financial schemes. This allows national authorities to anticipate, detect, and disrupt crimes that transcend borders. With the scope of exposure being broader than a person-specific notice, it can place entire categories of transactions or practices under heightened scrutiny worldwide.

Purple Notices operate with significantly less oversight than their Red Notice counterparts, which, as we have extensively documented on this blog, are already subject to widespread abuse and systemic flaws.

The Indian case centres on bank fraud involving Canara Bank, with authorities describing “circular trading” and shell company structures as sophisticated methods requiring international intelligence sharing. However, these techniques are standard elements of corporate fraud that domestic authorities routinely prosecute worldwide. Previous Purple Notices have addressed genuinely transnational phenomena. For example, in 2013, Norway requested the first-ever Purple Notice for the vessel Snake, which had changed names and flags multiple times to evade detection while engaging in illegal fishing. Later that year, New Zealand, supported by Australia and Norway, secured a Purple Notice for the vessel Thunder, another ship notorious for using multiple identities to conduct illegal fishing across jurisdictions. Both cases exemplify the proper use of Purple Notices: targeting criminal methods that transcend national borders and require global intelligence cooperation.

By contrast, India’s case appears domestically contained. The fundamental question becomes: what genuine international value does this Purple Notice provide? The answer appears limited, particularly when measured against the risks of diluting tools designed for truly cross-border criminal activities.

The timing amplifies these concerns. Interpol faces an ongoing credibility crisis, with systematic exploitation of its Red Notice system by authoritarian regimes targeting political opponents, journalists, human rights defenders, and business rivals. While Purple Notices have been fundamental tools in global intelligence cooperation, the Indian example is concerning: if circular trading and shell companies justify Purple Notices, virtually any corporate fraud investigation could be elevated to international significance.

While Purple Notices may not directly target individuals, they can significantly damage business reputations and trigger regulatory scrutiny across multiple jurisdictions. When deployed for routine domestic matters, they risk becoming tools of regulatory overreach rather than legitimate international cooperation. Until Interpol addresses its fundamental accountability deficits and implements meaningful oversight of all its notice types, such developments should be viewed with considerable skepticism.

—

Image: shubham dhiman via Unsplash