Russia, Interpol, and the Risks of Abuse

Recent reporting has once again drawn attention to a problem we have been documenting for years: the misuse of Interpol’s systems by authoritarian states, and the very real consequences this creates for individuals targeted abroad.

A BBC Eye Investigations report, based on leaked Interpol files, details how Russia has used Red Notices and diffusions to pursue critics, journalists, business figures, and political opponents outside its borders. The reporting highlights a striking pattern: Russia has generated more complaints to Interpol’s own oversight body than any other member country over the past decade, with hundreds of requests ultimately overturned.

That volume alone should prompt serious reflection. Red Notices are intended to support cooperation against serious crime. When they are repeatedly challenged and cancelled, it suggests something has gone wrong well before they ever circulate internationally.

We see the human side of this problem every day. Individuals targeted by abusive notices can face arrest, detention, travel restrictions, frozen bank accounts, and long-term reputational harm – often before any independent body has reviewed the underlying request. Even when a notice is eventually cancelled, the damage may already have been done.

One of the structural weaknesses exposed by the BBC’s reporting is timing. Interpol’s review processes move slowly, while the consequences of a Red Notice can be immediate. In practice, this means that politically motivated requests can function as a form of pressure or punishment, even if they are later found to be invalid.

The BBC’s investigation reinforces what many practitioners already know: without stronger checks, international policing tools can be repurposed in ways that undermine the very cooperation they were designed to support. Addressing that reality does not weaken Interpol. It protects it.

Persistent abuse must also have consequences. Where countries repeatedly misuse Red Notices and diffusions, allowing those requests to continue circulating without restriction, undermines the integrity of the entire system.

This reflects a concern we have raised consistently at Red Notice Monitor: safeguards that exist only on paper do little to protect those caught up in the process. Transparency, independent scrutiny, and enforceable limits on repeat offenders are essential if Interpol’s tools are to retain credibility and legitimacy.

Russia is not the only country to misuse Interpol mechanisms, but the scale and consistency of complaints linked to its requests are difficult to ignore – particularly in the current geopolitical context, where Ukrainians and others perceived as opponents of the Kremlin face heightened risk. For many individuals, challenging an abusive notice is slow, costly, and legally complex, meaning that questionable alerts may remain active for long periods without scrutiny.

The investigation also underscores a broader structural issue. Interpol’s review processes often move at a far slower pace than the real-world consequences of a Red Notice. While oversight bodies deliberate, individuals may face repeated arrests, travel restrictions, or damage to their professional and personal lives. Even when a notice is eventually cancelled, the harm caused in the interim cannot easily be undone.

Taken together, the findings reinforce a simple point: international policing tools are only as strong as the safeguards that surround them. Without clear timelines, proactive review of notices from high-risk jurisdictions, and meaningful consequences for misuse, systems designed to fight serious crime risk being repurposed for political ends.

The BBC’s investigation adds important evidence to an issue that has long been visible to practitioners. Addressing it is not about weakening international cooperation. It is about ensuring that cooperation remains lawful, proportionate, and worthy of trust.

—

Image: Bruno Guerrero via Unsplash