We use cookies where necessary to allow us to understand how people interact with our website and content, so that we can continue to improve our service.
We only ever receive anonymous information, and cannot track you across other websites.
View our privacy policy
Red Notice Monitor, in collaboration with China Watch, Hong Kong Watch and the Chinese Democratic Party, hosted a critical side event discussing Interpol’s future, examining the abuse of its Red Notice system, and transnational repression tactics
During Interpol’s 92nd General Assembly in Glasgow from 4th – 7th November 2024, Red Notice Monitor, in collaboration with China Watch, Hong Kong Watch and the Chinese Democratic Party, hosted a critical side event discussing Interpol’s future, examining the abuse of its Red Notice system, and transnational repression tactics. The seminar brought together experts, lawyers, and human rights advocates to examine case studies of political persecution and propose concrete reforms to strengthen Interpol’s oversight mechanisms. Information of the panel can be found here .
The panel, chaired by Sahar Zand , discussed the changes at the top of Interpol with the new Secretary General Valdecy Urquiza and the new members of the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee is the steering group of Interpol and it was noted with dismay that the People’s Republic of China has a seat on the Executive Committee.
The panel discussed how China is potentially Interpol’s “most successful abuser,” employing a highly sophisticated approach to transnational repression that extends far beyond the Red Notice system itself.
Ted Bromund, Interpol expert, explained that China’s approach, integrating Red Notice abuse with broader harassment campaigns makes it particularly effective. Abuse of Interpol’s systems tends to rely on accusing individuals of financial offences, fraud, breach of contract, failure to pay taxes, and other financial related offences.
“The PRC, in its approach, ‘evidences’ those alleged offences with wide-ranging measures unrelated to Interpol.” The coordinated harassment often includes direct threats to family members both in China and abroad, continuous surveillance, deployment of spyware, and coerced “voluntary” returns through various forms of intimidation.
“And that creates a very effective mechanism. The point of PRC Interpol abuse is not always to secure the return of the individual through Interpol. The point of PRC Interpol abuse is to pin that person down in place so that all of these other measures can then be applied to them. That’s a very sophisticated approach” Bromund noted.
The Foxhunt and Skynet Programs
The seminar devoted particular attention to China’s Foxhunt and Skynet programs, which are publicly presented as anti-corruption campaigns but serve a broader agenda. Ben Keith, barrister at 5 St Andrew’s Hill and editor of Red Notice Monitor, explained that China’s Foxhunt and Skynet programs, ostensibly aimed at anti-corruption, are also used to target dissidents and ideological opponents, particularly those who have become ‘westernized.’ These programs allow China to label dissidents as criminals under fabricated financial or fraud charges, a tactic that effectively uses Interpol’s Red Notices to prevent international mobility and silence opposition. “It’s ideological as much as it is about crime.” Keith warned that such abuse extends beyond the Chinese government’s borders, affecting Uyghur, Tibetan, and Hong Kong dissidents worldwide.
Benson emphasised the urgent need for transparency from Interpol, particularly around Red Notices originating from Hong Kong and China. He suggested that aggregate data on Red Notices reviewed and rejected for political motivations would be a meaningful step toward accountability.
It would be useful to know at least how many Red Notices have been reviewed to ensure that they are not politically motivated coming from a country like Hong Kong and how many have been rejected.
Given its relationship with Hong Kong and the presence of 180,000 Hong Kongers who have arrived since 2021, the seminar underlined the UK’s special responsibility in addressing these issues. Thomas Benson from Hong Kong Watch called for the UK Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee to launch an inquiry into the abuse of Red Notices as tools of transnational repression.
China is not alone in using Interpol’s Red Notice system to advance political agendas. Countries like Russia, Türkiye, and the UAE have adapted similar strategies, employing Red Notices to suppress dissidents abroad. Russia’s approach , which often targets high-profile critics like Bill Browder, involves a brazen use of fabricated Red Notices to detain individuals in foreign countries temporarily, disrupt their lives, and undermine their financial security. Türkiye , in particular, has issued thousands of Red Notices post-2016 coup attempt to track down alleged dissidents, including Kurdish activists and followers of Fethullah Gülen. These nations leverage Interpol’s infrastructure for political gain, often with little accountability or oversight.
Rhys Davies, barrister at Temple Garden Chambers and editor of Red Notice Monitor, underscored the significant influence that member countries wield based on their financial contributions. Davies discussed how the UAE, through the INTERPOL Foundation for a Safer World, has historically provided voluntary funding, raising concerns about the influence such funding might exert over Interpol’s governance and decision-making. This funding model includes voluntary contributions from democratic countries, like Canada and Norway, yet does not always translate into democratic influence within Interpol. This imbalance highlights the challenges of Interpol’s structure, which, as Davies and others suggested, risks greater manipulation by authoritarian nations.
The panel outlined several essential reforms required to address systemic abuse within Interpol. Ted Bromund emphasised the need for enhanced oversight: “The Notices and Diffusions Task Force, which is responsible for the initial screening of Red Notices inside Interpol, needs more staff. The CCF, Interpol’s appellate body, needs vastly more staff and really should become an ongoing organization.” Currently, the CCF meets only four times a year for a week each, creating significant delays in processing appeals.
Proposed Key Reforms:
Enhanced Transparency
Enhanced Oversight Mechanisms
National-Level Reforms
The seminar revealed concerning gaps in the international response to Interpol abuse. Bromund noted that “even the democracies in the West have not really cooperated effectively with each other in trying to even hold the position within Interpol, much less try to advance the kind of reforms that are needed.”
This lack of coordination extends even to European Union members, who often fail to present unified candidates for Interpol’s Executive Committee elections, potentially allowing representatives from countries like Türkiye and Russia to secure positions through split voting. The success of any reforms will depend largely on democratic nations’ willingness to assert themselves within Interpol’s framework and push for meaningful change and a fundamental shift in how Interpol approaches its oversight responsibilities.
For continued coverage of Interpol’s Red Notice system follow Red Notice Monitor’s ongoing reporting.
If you require legal advice from specialist Interpol Red Notice lawyers about any matter relating to Interpol, please contact us here . You can read more about us, here .
How the UK’s latest move targets fraud-linked wealth under Interpol’s pilot Silver Notice system
As Interpol’s notices become a growing tool of international enforcement, alarming data reveals just how vulnerable the system is to misuse.
The arrest of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte in early 2025, reportedly aided by Interpol mechanisms, marks a significant development in international criminal law — and a serious challenge for Interpol’s commitment to political neutrality under its Constitution.